Update on cervical disc arthroplasty: where are we and where are we going?

Jorge J Jaramillo-de la Torre, Jonathan N Grauer, James J Yue, Jorge J Jaramillo-de la Torre, Jonathan N Grauer, James J Yue

Abstract

Despite the very good results of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, there are concerns of adjacent level degeneration. For this reason, interest has grown in the potential for motion sparing alternatives. Cervical disc arthroplasty is thus evolving as a potential alternative to fusion. Specific design characteristic and implants will be reviewed and outcomes summarized.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Lateral cervical radiograph of a patient with multilevel spondylosis (a) for which an ACDF was performed at C56 and C67 for radicular symptoms (b)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Lateral cervical radiograph (a) of a patient with a disc herniation at the C67 level. Prodisc-C was performed and lateral (b), flexion (c), and extension films (d) are shown
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Lateral cervical radiograph with degenerative changes at CC56 and C67 (a). Two-level discovery arthroplasty was performed and postoperative lateral (b), flexion (c), and extension (d) films are shown

References

    1. Robinson R, Walker A, Ferlic D. The results of anterior interbody fusion of the cervical spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1962;44:1569–87.
    1. Bartolomei JC, Theodore N, Sonntag VK. Adjacent level degeneration after anterior cervical fusion: a clinical review. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2005;16(4):575–87. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2005.07.004.
    1. Mehren C, Mayer HM. Artificial cervical disc replacement—an update. Neurol India. 2005;53(4):440–4.
    1. Phillips FM, Garfin SR. Cervical disc replacement. Spine. 2005;30(17 Suppl):S27–S33. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000175192.55139.69.
    1. Puttlitz CM, DiAngelo DJ. Cervical spine arthroplasty biomechanics. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2005;16(4):589–94. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2005.07.002.
    1. Maiman DJ, Kumaresan S, Yoganandan N, et al. Biomechanical effect of anterior cervical spine fusion on adjacent segments. Biomed Mater Eng. 1999;9(1):27–38.
    1. DiAngelo DJ, Roberston JT, Metcalf NH. Biomechanical testing of an artificial cervical joint and an anterior cervical plate. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003;16(4):314–23.
    1. Eck JC, Humphreys SC, Lim TH, et al. Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion. Spine. 2002;27(22):2431–4. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200211150-00003.
    1. Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA, et al. Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81(4):519–28.
    1. Goffin J, Geusens E, Vantomme N, et al. Long-term follow-up after interbody fusion of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2004;17(2):79–85.
    1. Henderson CM, Hennessy RG, Shuey HM, et al. Posterior-lateral foraminotomy as an exclusive operative technique for cervical radiculopathy: a review of 846 consecutively operated cases. Neurosurgery. 1983;13(5):504–12. doi: 10.1097/00006123-198311000-00004.
    1. Goffin J, Loon J, Calenbergh F, et al. Long-term results after anterior cervical fusion and osteosynthetic stabilization for fractures and/or dislocations of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord. 1995;8(6):500–8. doi: 10.1097/00002517-199512000-00014.
    1. Albert TJ, Eichenbaum MD. Goals of cervical disc replacement. Spine J. 2004;4(6 Suppl):292S–3S. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.07.023.
    1. Sekhon LH, Ball JR. Artificial cervical disc replacement: principles, types and techniques. Neurol India. 2005;53(4):445–50.
    1. Wigfield CC, Skrzypiec D, Jackowski A, et al. Internal stress distribution in cervical intervertebral discs: the influence of an artificial cervical joint and simulated anterior interbody fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003;16(5):441–9. doi: 10.1097/00024720-200310000-00002.
    1. Robertson JT, Papadopoulos SM, Traynelis VC. Assessment of adjacent-segment disease in patients treated with cervical fusion or arthroplasty: a prospective 2-year study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;3(6):417–23.
    1. Hilibrand AS, Yoo JU, Carlson GD, et al. The success of anterior cervical arthrodesis adjacent to a previous fusion. Spine. 1997;22(14):1574–9. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199707150-00009.
    1. Acosta FL, Jr, Ames CP. Cervical disc arthroplasty: general introduction. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2005;16(4):603–7. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2005.07.003.
    1. Pimenta L, McAfee PC, Cappuccino A, et al. Clinical experience with the new artificial cervical PCM (Cervitech) disc. Spine J. 2004;4(6 Suppl):315S–21S. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.07.024.
    1. Durbhakula MM, Ghiselli G. Cervical total disc replacement, part I: rationale, biomechanics, and implant types. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005;36(3):349–54. doi: 10.1016/j.ocl.2005.02.011.
    1. Mummaneni PV, Burkus JK, Haid RW, Traynelis VC, Zdeblick TA. Clinical and radiographic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;6(3):198–209. doi: 10.3171/spi.2007.6.3.198.
    1. McAfee PC. The indications for lumbar and cervical disc replacement. Spine J. 2004;4(6 Suppl):177S–81S. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.07.003.
    1. Sekhon LH. Cervical arthroplasty in the management of spondylotic myelopathy: 18-month results. Neurosurg Focus. 2004;17(3):E8. doi: 10.3171/foc.2004.17.3.8.
    1. Wang Y, Zhang X, Xiao S, et al. Clinical report of cervical arthroplasty in management of spondylotic myelopathy in Chinese. J Orthop Surg. 2006;1:13. doi: 10.1186/1749-799X-1-13.
    1. Pimenta L, McAfee PC, Cappuccino A, et al. Superiority of multilevel cervical arthroplasty outcomes versus single-level outcomes: 229 consecutive PCM prostheses. Spine. 2007;32(12):1337–44. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318059af12.
    1. Traynelis VC. The Prestige cervical disc. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2005;16(4):621–8. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2005.06.001.
    1. Chi JH, Ames CP, Tay B. General considerations for cervical arthroplasty with technique for ProDisc-C. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2005;16(4):609–19. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2005.07.001.
    1. Papadopoulos S. The Bryan cervical disc system. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2005;16(4):629–36. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2005.06.003.
    1. Mummaneni PV, Robinson JC, Haid RW., Jr Cervical arthroplasty with the PRESTIGE LP cervical disc. Neurosurgery. 2007;60(4 Suppl 2):310–4.
    1. Link HD, McAfee PC, Pimenta L. Choosing a cervical disc replacement. Spine J. 2004;4(Suppl 6):294S–302S. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.07.022.
    1. Sekhon LH, Duggal N, Lynch JJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging clarity of the Bryan, Prodisc-C, Prestige LP, and PCM cervical arthroplasty devices. Spine. 2007;32(6):673–80. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000257547.17822.14.
    1. Traynelis VC. The Prestige cervical disc replacement. Spine J. 2004;4(6 Suppl):310S–4S. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.07.025.
    1. Singh K, An HS. Motion preservation technologies: alternatives to spinal fusion. Am J Orthop. 2006;35(9):411–6.
    1. Orr RD, Postak PD, Rosca M, et al. The current state of cervical and lumbar spinal disc arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:70–5. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.00396.
    1. Bryan VE., Jr Cervical motion segment replacement. Eur Spine J. 2002;11(Suppl 2):S92–7.
    1. Lafuente J, Casey AT, Petzold A, et al. The Bryan cervical disc prosthesis as an alternative to arthrodesis in the treatment of cervical spondylosis: 46 consecutive cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(4):508–12. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.87B4.15436.
    1. Anderson PA, Sasso RC, Rouleau JP, et al. The Bryan cervical disc: wear properties and early clinical results. Spine J. 2004;4(6 Suppl):303S–9S. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.07.026.
    1. Porchet F, Metcalf NH. Clinical outcomes with the Prestige II cervical disc: preliminary results from a prospective randomized clinical trial. Neurosurg Focus. 2004;17(3):E6. doi: 10.3171/foc.2004.17.3.6.
    1. Wang MY, Leung CH, Casey AT. Cervical arthroplasty with the Bryan disc. Neurosurgery. 2005;56(1 Suppl):58–65. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000153216.68321.C2.
    1. Wigfield CC, Gill SS, Nelson RJ, et al. The new Frenchay artificial cervical joint: results from a two-year pilot study. Spine. 2002;27(22):2446–52. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200211150-00006.
    1. Hacker RJ. Cervical disc arthroplasty: a controlled randomized prospective study with intermediate follow-up results. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;3(6):424–8.
    1. Nabhan A, Ahlhelm F, Shariat K, et al. The ProDisc-C prosthesis: clinical and radiological experience 1 year after surgery. Spine. 2007;32(18):1935–41. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31813162d8.
    1. Sasso RC, Smucker JD, Hacker RJ, et al. Clinical outcomes of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial with 24-month follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007;20(7):481–91. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3180310534.
    1. Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Pfeiffer F, et al. Early results after ProDisc-C cervical disc replacement. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;2(4):403–10.
    1. Goffin J, Calenbergh F, Loon J, et al. Intermediate follow-up after treatment of degenerative disc disease with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis: single-level and bi-level. Spine. 2003;28(24):2673–8. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000099392.90849.AA.
    1. Bertagnoli R, Duggal N, Pickett GE, et al. Cervical total disc replacement, part two: clinical results. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005;36(3):355–62. doi: 10.1016/j.ocl.2005.02.009.
    1. Robertson JT, Metcalf NH. Long-term outcome after implantation of the Prestige I disc in an end-stage indication: 4-year results from a pilot study. Neurosurg Focus. 2004;17(3):E10. doi: 10.3171/foc.2004.17.3.10.
    1. Pickett GE, Sekhon LH, Sears WR, et al. Complications with cervical arthroplasty. J Neurosurg Spine. 2006;4(2):98–105. doi: 10.3171/spi.2006.4.2.98.
    1. Pracyk JB, Traynelis VC. Treatment of the painful motion segment: cervical arthroplasty. Spine. 2005;30(16 Suppl):S23–32. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000174507.45083.98.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj