Effects of preoperative segmental mobility on the clinical and radiographic outcomes following one-level artificial cervical disc replacement
- Author:
- No author available
- Journal Title:
- National Medical Journal of China
- Issue:
- 45
- DOI:
- 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20200610-01813
- Key Word:
- 颈椎;颈椎人工间盘置换术;活动度;临床疗效;Cervical vertebrae;Artificial cervical disc replacement;Range of motion;Clinical outcome
Abstract： Objective:To investigate the effects of preoperative segmental range of motion (ROM) on clinical and radiographical outcomes after artificial cervical disc replacement (ACDR) and explore whether ACDR could be indicated for patients with preoperative limited or excessive segmental ROM.Methods:From January 2008 to December 2017, patients who underwent Prestige-LP ACDR in West China Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. The preoperative and postoperative X-rays of the cervical spine were collected to measure the radiographic parameters, including cervical lordosis (CL), C 2-7 ROM, disc height (DH), disc angle (DA) and ROM at the arthroplasty level. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) and the Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores. The correlation between preoperative segmental ROM and postoperative clinical and radiographical outcomes were also analyzed. Results:A total of 161 patients were analyzed, with 73 males and 88 females. The mean age was (44±8) years, and the follow-up period was 34 months (12-120 months). JOA and NDI scores improved after ACDR ( P<0.05). However, postoperative C 2-7 ROM and ROM at the arthroplasty level were comparable with preoperative counterparts (both P>0.05). Preoperative segmental ROM positively correlated with C 2-7 ROM and ROM at the arthroplasty segment ( r=0.213、0.271, both P<0.05), but was negatively correlated with the change of ROM ( r=-0.534, P<0.05). The segmental ROM was 4.0°±1.0° in the limited-ROM group (A) and 14.6°±1.3° in the excessive-ROM group (B), respectively. There were significantly more patients diagnosed with cervical spondylosis in group A than in group B (35.5% vs 10.7%, P<0.05). The level-distribution was statistically different between the two groups. C 5/6 and C 6/7 were prone to limited motion in group A, while C 4/5 and C 5/6 were predisposed to excessive motion in group B (all P<0.05). After surgery, C 2-7 ROM increased for 14.2°±16.8° in group A, while paradoxically decreased for 2.2°±14.4° in group B. However, C 2-7 ROM in group B was still larger than that in group A ( P<0.05). Similarly, the ROM at the arthroplasty level increased by 3.1°±3.7° in group A, whereas the values decreased by 4.4°±4.2° in group B postoperatively. In addition, group A still had less segmental ROM than group B ( P<0.05). The preoperative DH in group A was less than that in group B ( P<0.05). The rates of ASD, HO, and high-grade HO in group A were all higher than those in group B but without significant differences (all P>0.05). Conclusion:Preoperative segmental ROM has no significant effects on clinical outcomes after ACDR; it has a positive correlation with postoperative global and segmental ROM while is negatively correlated with ROM change.
- [1]U, Fernstr?m.Arthroplasty with intercorporal endoprothesis in herniated disc and in painful disc.[J].1966,357.
- [2]Zhou, Feifei,Ju, Kevin L.,Zhao, Yanbin,etc.Progressive Bone Formation After Cervical Disc Replacement Minimum of 5-Year Follow-up[J].2018,43(3).
- [3]Cunningham BW,McAfee PC,Devine J,etc.Classification of heterotopic ossification (HO) in artificial disk replacement.[J].2003,16(4).
- [4]Kang, K. C.,Lee, C. S.,Han, J. H.,etc.The factors that influence the postoperative segmental range of motion after cervical artificial disc replacement[J].2010,10(8).
- [5]Christoph Mehren,Karin Wuertz-Kozak,Daniel Sauer,etc.Implant Design and the Anchoring Mechanism Influence the Incidence of Heterotopic Ossification in Cervical Total Disc Replacement at 2-year Follow-up[J].2019,44(21).
- [6]Gornet, Matthew F.,Burkus, J. Kenneth,Shaffrey, Mark E.,etc.Cervical disc arthroplasty with PRESTIGE LP disc versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a prospective, multicenter investigational device exemption study[J].2015,23(5).
- [7].Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with Prestige LP Disc Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Seven-Year Outcomes.[J].2016,(Spec).
- [8]Lavelle, William F.,Riew, K. Daniel,Levi, Allan D.,etc.Ten-year Outcomes of Cervical Disc Replacement With the BRYAN Cervical Disc Results From a Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial[J].2019,44(9).
- [9]Walraevens J,Liu B,Vander-Sloten J,etc.Qualitative and quantitative assessment of degeneration of cervical intervertebral discs and facet joints.[J].2009,18(3).
- [10]Boselie, Toon F. M.,van Santbrink, Henk,de Bie, Rob A.,etc.Pilot Study of Sequence of Segmental Contributions in the Lower Cervical Spine During Active Extension and Flexion[J].2017,42(11).
- [11]J Dvorák,M M Panjabi,D Grob,etc.Clinical Validation of Functional Flexion/Extension Radiographs of the Cervical Spine[J].1993,18(1).
- [12]Patwardhan, Avinash G.,Carandang, Gerard,Voronov, Leonard I.,etc.Are Collapsed Cervical Discs Amenable to Total Disc Arthroplasty?: Analysis of Prospective Clinical Data With 2-Year Follow Up[J].2016,41(24).
- [13]Geisler, Fred H.,Reah, Christopher,Gilder, Kye M.,etc.Long-term Outcomes of the US FDA IDE Prospective, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing PCM Cervical Disc Arthroplasty With Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion[J].2015,40(10).
- [14]Kim, S. W.,Paik, S. H.,Castro, P. A.,etc.Analysis of factors that may influence range of motion after cervical disc arthroplasty[J].2010,10(8).
- [15]Davis,R.J.,Peterson,D.L.,Kim,K.D.,etc.Cervical total disc replacement with the mobi-C cervical artificial disc compared with anterior discectomy and fusion for treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease: A prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial: Clinica[J].2013,19(5).
- [16]Tu TH,Ko CC,Wu CL,etc.Differences between soft-disc herniation and spondylosis in cervical arthroplasty: CT-documented heterotopic ossification with minimum 2 years of follow-up.[J].2012,16(2).
- [17]Heikki Vanharanta,Timothy Floyd,Donna Ohnmeiss,etc.The Relationship of Facet Tropism to Degenerative Disc Disease[J].1993,18(8).
- [18]Zeng, Junfeng,Liu, Hao,Chen, Hua,etc.Effect of Prosthesis Width and Depth on Heterotopic Ossification After Cervical Disc Arthroplasty[J].2019,44(9).
- [19]Murrey,D.,Zigler,J.E.,Spivak,J.,etc.ProDisc-C and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as surgical treatment for single-level cervical symptomatic degenerative disc disease: Five-year results of a food and drug administration study[J].2013,38(3).