Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society

The Korean Neurosurgical Society (대한신경외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Clinical and Radiological Effect of Abnormal Axis after Cervical Arthroplasty

  • Jang, Hyun Jun (Department of Neurosurgery, Inha University College of Medicine) ;
  • Oh, Chang Hyun (Department of Neurosurgery, Teun Teun Research Institute) ;
  • Yoon, Seung Hwan (Department of Neurosurgery, Inha University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Ji Yong (Department of Neurosurgery, Inha University College of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Hyeong Chun (Department of Neurosurgery, Inha University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Yoon Hyuk (Mechanical Engineering, Kyung Hee University)
  • Received : 2015.04.20
  • Accepted : 2015.06.17
  • Published : 2015.10.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective : The clinical outcomes according to the radiological results after cervical total disc replacement (TDR) are not well established. Here, the authors reviewed the clinical results according to the asymmetry in radiographs. Methods : This retrospective analysis included patients after TDR ($Mobi-C^{(R)}$ disc) with at least 12 months follow up, and the clinical and radiological data were obtained preoperatively and postoperatively for 12 months. Clinical outcome measures numerical rating scale (NRS) score for neck pain, visual analog scale (VAS) for arm pain, and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) value. The asymmetries of TDRs were evaluated on the anterior-posterior (AP) and the lateral radiographs, and the radiographic adjacent segment degenerations were evaluated for 12 months. Results : A total of 24 patients (one level cervical TDR; 10 male and 14 female; aged $41.50{\pm}8.35years$) were included in this study. The clinical results including NRS for neck pain, VAS for arm pain, and ODIs were similar between the normal and asymmetrized TDRs in AP and lateral radiographs. The radiographic adjacent segment degenerations were significantly increased in deviated TDRs (AP >10 mm asymmetry and lateral>10 mm asymmetry). Conclusion : Asymmetrical location of TDR is not related to the clinical outcomes, but related to the risk of radiographic adjacent disc segment degeneration.

Keywords

References

  1. Amevo B, Worth D, Bogduk N : Instantaneous axes of rotation of the typical cervical motion segments : a study in normal volunteers. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 6 : 111-117, 1991 https://doi.org/10.1016/0268-0033(91)90008-E
  2. Barrey C, Champain S, Campana S, Ramadan A, Perrin G, Skalli W : Sagittal alignment and kinematics at instrumented and adjacent levels after total disc replacement in the cervical spine. Eur Spine J 21 : 1648-1659, 2012 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2180-8
  3. Bohlman HH, Emery SE, Goodfellow DB, Jones PK : Robinson anterior cervical discectomy and arthrodesis for cervical radiculopathy. Long-term follow-up of one hundred and twenty-two patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75 : 1298-1307, 1993 https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199309000-00005
  4. Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Campbell MJ, Anderson PA : Neck Disability Index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain : the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion. Spine J 10 : 469-474, 2010 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2010.02.007
  5. Chen J, Wang X, Bai W, Shen X, Yuan W : Prevalence of heterotopic ossification after cervical total disc arthroplasty : a meta-analysis. Eur Spine J 21 : 674-680, 2012 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-2094-x
  6. Cloward RB : Cervical diskography; technique, indications and use in diagnosis of ruptured cervical disks. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 79 : 563-574, 1958
  7. Davis RJ, Kim KD, Hisey MS, Hoffman GA, Bae HW, Gaede SE, et al. : 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 tria l : clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 19 : 532-545, 2013 https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.6.SPINE12527
  8. Eck JC, Humphreys SC, Lim TH, Jeong ST, Kim JG, Hodges SD, et al. : Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27 : 2431-2434, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200211150-00003
  9. Garrido BJ, Taha TA, Sasso RC : Clinical outcomes of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty a prospective, randomized, controlled, single site trial with 48-month follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 23 : 367-371, 2010 https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181bb8568
  10. Goffin J, Geusens E, Vantomme N, Quintens E, Waerzeggers Y, Depreitere B, et al. : Long-term follow-up after interbody fusion of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord Tech 17 : 79-85, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1097/00024720-200404000-00001
  11. Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA, Jones PK, Bohlman HH : Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81 : 519-528, 1999 https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199904000-00009
  12. Ipsen BJ, Kim DH, Jenis LG, Tromanhauser SG, Banco RJ : Effect of plate position on clinical outcome after anterior cervical spine surgery. Spine J 7 : 637-642, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2006.09.003
  13. Matsunaga S, Kabayama S, Yamamoto T, Yone K, Sakou T, Nakanishi K : Strain on intervertebral discs after anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24 : 670-675, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199904010-00011
  14. 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 Neuro surg Spine 6 : 198-209, 2007 https://doi.org/10.3171/spi.2007.6.3.198
  15. Park JH, Roh KH, Cho JY, Ra YS, Rhim SC, Noh SW : Comparative analysis of cervical arthroplasty using mobi-c(r) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using the solis(r) -cage. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 44 : 217-221, 2008 https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2008.44.4.217
  16. 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 3 : 417-423, 2005 https://doi.org/10.3171/spi.2005.3.6.0417
  17. Rong X, Gong Q, Liu H, Hong Y, Lou J, Wu W, et al. : The effect of deviated center of rotation on flexion-extension range of motion after single-level cervical arthroplasty : an in vivo study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39 (26 Spec No.) : B12-B18, 2014 https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000634
  18. Vital JM, Guerin P, Gille O, Pointillart V, Aurouer N, Obeid I : The Mobi-C(R) cervical disc prosthesis : indications, technique and results. Interact Surg 3 : 181-186, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11610-007-0038-2
  19. Yamagata T, Takami T, Uda T, Ikeda H, Nagata T, Sakamoto S, et al. : Outcomes of contemporary use of rectangular titanium stand-alone cages in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: cage subsidence and cervical alignment. J Clin Neurosci 19 : 1673-1678, 2012 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2011.11.043
  20. Yue JJ, Bertagnoli R, McAfee PC, An HS : Motion preservation surgery of the spine : advanced techniques and controversies. Philadelphia : Saunders Elsevier, 2008, pp231-237