Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 9 of 9 items for

  • Author or Editor: Kris Radcliff x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Kris Radcliff, Domagoj Coric and Todd Albert

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to report the outcome of a study of 2-level cervical total disc replacement (Mobi-C) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Although the long-term outcome of single-level disc replacement has been extensively described, there have not been previous reports of the 5-year outcome of 2-level cervical disc replacement.

METHODS

This study reports the 5-year results of a prospective, randomized US FDA investigational device exemption (IDE) study conducted at 24 centers in patients with 2-level, contiguous, cervical spondylosis. Clinical outcomes at up to 60 months were evaluated, including validated outcome measures, incidence of reoperation, and adverse events. The complete study data and methodology were critically reviewed by 3 independent surgeon authors without affiliation with the IDE study or financial or institutional bias toward the study sponsor.

RESULTS

A total of 225 patients received the Mobi-C cervical total disc replacement device and 105 patients received ACDF. The Mobi-C and ACDF follow-up rates were 90.7% and 86.7%, respectively (p = 0.39), at 60 months. There was significant improvement in all outcome scores relative to baseline at all time points. The Mobi-C patients had significantly more improvement than ACDF patients in terms of Neck Disability Index score, SF-12 Physical Component Summary, and overall satisfaction with treatment at 60 months. The reoperation rate was significantly lower with Mobi-C (4%) versus ACDF (16%). There were no significant differences in the adverse event rate between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both cervical total disc replacement and ACDF significantly improved general and disease-specific measures compared with baseline. However, there was significantly greater improvement in general and disease-specific outcome measures and a lower rate of reoperation in the 2-level disc replacement patients versus ACDF control patients.

Clinical trial registration no. NCT00389597 (clinicaltrials.gov)

Full access

Kris Radcliff, Jason Lerner, Chao Yang, Thierry Bernard and Jack E. Zigler

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 7-year cost-effectiveness of cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of patients with single-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease. A change in the spending trajectory for spine care is to be achieved, in part, through the selection of interventions that have been proven effective yet cost less than other options. This analysis complements and builds upon findings from other cost-effectiveness evaluations of CTDR through the use of long-term, patient-level data from a randomized study.

METHODS

This was a 7-year health economic evaluation comparing CTDR versus ACDF from the US commercial payer perspective. Prospectively collected health care resource utilization and treatment effects (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) were obtained from individual patient-level adverse event reports and SF-36 data, respectively, from the randomized, multicenter ProDisc-C total disc replacement investigational device exemption (IDE) study and post-approval study. Statistical distributions for unit costs were derived from a commercial claims database and applied using Monte Carlo simulation. Patient-level costs and effects were modeled via multivariate probabilistic analysis. Confidence intervals for 7-year costs, effects, and net monetary benefit (NMB) were obtained using the nonparametric percentile method from results of 10,000 bootstrap simulations. The robustness of results was assessed through scenario analysis and within a parametric regression model controlling for baseline variables.

RESULTS

Seven-year follow-up data were available for more than 70% of the 209 randomized patients. In the base-case analysis, CTDR resulted in mean per-patient cost savings of $12,789 (95% CI $5362–$20,856) and per-patient QALY gains of 0.16 (95% CI −0.073 to 0.39) compared with ACDF over 7 years. CTDR was more effective and less costly in 90.8% of probabilistic simulations. CTDR was cost-effective in 99.8% of sensitivity analysis simulations and generated a mean incremental NMB of $20,679 (95% CI $6053–$35,377) per patient at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this modeling evaluation, CTDR was found to be more effective and less costly over a 7-year time horizon for patients with single-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease. These results are robust across a range of scenarios and perspectives and are intended to support value-based decision making.

Full access

Shian Liu, Renaud Lafage, Justin S. Smith, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Virginie C. Lafage, Vincent Challier, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Kris Radcliff, Paul M. Arnold, Jens R. Chapman, Frank J. Schwab, Eric M. Massicotte, S. Tim Yoon, Michael G. Fehlings and Christopher P. Ames

OBJECT

Cervical stenosis is a defining feature of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Matsunaga et al. proposed that elements of stenosis are both static and dynamic, where the dynamic elements magnify the canal deformation of the static state. For the current study, the authors hypothesized that dynamic changes may be associated with myelopathy severity and neck disability. This goal of this study was to present novel methods of dynamic motion analysis in CSM.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis was performed of a prospective, multicenter database of patients with CSM from the AOSpine North American study. One hundred ten patients (34%) met inclusion criteria, which were symptomatic CSM, age over 18 years, baseline flexion/extension radiographs, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires (modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association [mJOA] score, Neck Disability Index [NDI], the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Score [SF-36 PCS], and Nurick grade). The mean age was 56.9 ± 12 years, and 42% of patients were women (n = 46). Correlations with HRQOL measures were analyzed for regional (cervical lordosis and cervical sagittal vertical axis) and focal parameters (kyphosis and spondylolisthesis between adjacent vertebrae) in flexion and extension. Baseline dynamic parameters (flexion/extension cone relative to a fixed C-7, center of rotation [COR], and range of motion arc relative to the COR) were also analyzed for correlations with HRQOL measures.

RESULTS

At baseline, the mean HRQOL measures demonstrated disability and the mean radiographic parameters demonstrated sagittal malalignment. Among regional parameters, there was a significant correlation between decreased neck flexion (increased C2–7 angle in flexion) and worse Nurick grade (R = 0.189, p = 0.048), with no significant correlations in extension. Focal parameters, including increased C-7 sagittal translation overT-1 (slip), were significantly correlated with greater myelopathy severity (mJOA score, Flexion R = −0.377, p = 0.003; mJOA score, Extension R = −0.261, p = 0.027). Sagittal slip at C-2 and C-4 also correlated with worse HRQOL measures. Reduced flexion/extension motion cones, a more posterior COR, and smaller range of motion correlated with worse general health SF-36 PCS and Nurick grade.

CONCLUSIONS

Dynamic motion analysis may play an important role in understanding CSM. Focal parameters demonstrated a significant correlation with worse HRQOL measures, especially increased C-7 sagittal slip in flexion and extension. Novel methods of motion analysis demonstrating reduced motion cones correlated with worse myelopathy grades. More posterior COR and smaller range of motion were both correlated with worse general health scores (SF-36 PCS and Nurick grade). To our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate correlation of dynamic motion and listhesis with disability and myelopathy in CSM.