Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 48 items for

  • Author or Editor: Regis W. Haid x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

The future in the care of the cervical spine: interbody fusion and arthroplasty

Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves, March 2004

Praveen V. Mummaneni and Regis W. Haid

✓ In the past 50 years tremendous advances have been made in the treatment of cervical disc disease with cervical fusion. Fusion rates have surpassed 95% after application of anterior cervical implants. Adjacent-segment degeneration, however, has plagued the long-term clinical success of cervical fusion.

Cervical arthroplasty has been introduced to maintain cervical motion and potentially avoid or minimize adjacent-segment degeneration. If cervical arthroplasty is successful, the long-term results of surgery for cervical disc disease may improve; however, there are associated drawbacks that must be overcome. Implant wear, fatigue, and failure have been reported in cases of large-joint arthroplasty, and research is underway to limit these problems in cervical arthroplasty.

In this article the authors trace the evolution of cervical fusion and the new technique of cervical arthroplasty. The nomenclature of cervical arthroplasty will also be introduced.

Full access

The future in the care of the cervical spine: interbody fusion and arthroplasty

Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves, March 2004

Praveen V. Mummaneni and Regis W. Haid

✓ In the past 50 years tremendous advances have been made in the treatment of cervical disc disease with cervical fusion. Fusion rates have surpassed 95% after application of anterior cervical implants. Adjacent-segment degeneration, however, has plagued the long-term clinical success of cervical fusion.

Cervical arthroplasty has been introduced to maintain cervical motion and potentially avoid or minimize adjacent-segment degeneration. If cervical arthroplasty is successful, the long-term results of surgery for cervical disc disease may improve; however, there are associated drawbacks that must be overcome. Implant wear, fatigue, and failure have been reported in cases of large-joint arthroplasty, and research is underway to limit these problems in cervical arthroplasty.

In this article the authors trace the evolution of cervical fusion and the new technique of cervical arthroplasty. The nomenclature of cervical arthroplasty will also be introduced.

Restricted access

Eric W. Scott, Regis W. Haid Jr. and David Peace

✓ Only four cases of Type I odontoid fracture have been previously described in the English literature. Most authors consider this lesion to be stable, although the mechanism(s) of injury has not been clearly elucidated. A case of Type I odontoid fracture in association with atlanto-occipital and atlantoaxial dislocation resulting in death is presented. The normal ligamentous anatomy is reviewed and proposed mechanisms for this injury are discussed. The radiographic features of all reported cases of this type are reviewed. It is proposed that the Type I odontoid fracture is a likely manifestation of atlanto-occipital instability and rarely occurs as an isolated or stable injury.

Restricted access

Lumbar interbody fusion: state-of-the-art technical advances

Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves, March 2004

Praveen V. Mummaneni, Regis W. Haid and Gerald E. Rodts

✓ During the past few decades, three techniques have been used to achieve circumferential lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). They include posterior LIF, anterior LIF with supplemental posterior fixation, and transforaminal LIF. In this article, the authors describe the indications and contraindications for the use of interbody fusion. The advantages and disadvantages of each will be discussed in detail. Additionally, strategies for minimally invasive access and options for interbody spacer materials will be discussed.

Full access

Atul Goel

Restricted access

Alexander F. Post, Prithvi Narayan and Regis W. Haid Jr.

✓ The authors report on the management of occipital neuralgia secondary to an abnormality of the atlas in which the posterior arch was separated by a fibrous band from the lateral masses, resulting in C-2 nerve root compression. The causes and treatments of occipital neuralgia as well as the development of the atlas are reviewed.

Restricted access
Restricted access

J. Kenneth Burkus, Regis W. Haid Jr., Vincent C. Traynelis and Praveen V. Mummaneni

Object

The purpose of this study was to determine long-term clinical outcomes in patients undergoing anterior cervical surgery in which a cervical disc prosthesis was used to treat single-level degenerative cervical disc disease.

Methods

In this prospective, nonblinded study, 541 patients at 32 investigational sites were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatment groups. The results of the investigational group, in which patients received the Prestige disc prosthesis, were compared with those of the control group, in which patients underwent an instrumented interbody fusion. Data were collected preoperatively, intraoperatively, and at 1.5, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 60 months postoperatively. To date, 271 patients have completed 5 years of clinical follow-up (144 investigational and 127 control patients).

Results

Significant improvements in Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores, Physical Component Summary scores of the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, and neck and arm pain scores were achieved by 1.5 months in both groups and sustained at 5 years. The mean NDI improvements from preoperative scores were 35.4, 36.3, and 38.4 at 24, 36, and 60 months, respectively, in the investigational group. The corresponding mean NDI improvements were 33.9, 31.3, and 34.1 in the control group. The intergroup differences at both 36 and 60 months were significant (p = 0.008 and 0.022, respectively). The overall rates of maintenance or improvement in neurological status in the investigational group were 91.6%, 92.8%, and 95.0%, respectively, at 24, 36, and 60 months compared with 83.6%, 83.2%, and 88.9% in the control group (p = 0.006, 0.004, and 0.051, respectively). The implant effectively maintained angular motion, averaging more than 7.3° at 36 months and 6.5° at 60 months after surgery. No implant migration was observed up to 60 months. There were statistically significant differences between the investigational and control groups with regard to the rate of revision and supplemental fixation surgical procedures performed subsequent to the index procedure. Additional surgical procedures for adjacent-segment disease were observed in both treatment groups. Rates for surgery at adjacent levels trended lower in the investigational group (8 patients [11 surgeries]) compared with those in the control group (13 patients [16 surgeries]), but the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.376). Some of the second surgeries involved both index and adjacent levels.

Conclusions

The Prestige disc maintains improved clinical outcomes and segmental motion after implantation at 5-year follow-up.

Full access

J. Kenneth Burkus, Vincent C. Traynelis, Regis W. Haid Jr. and Praveen V. Mummaneni

Object

The authors assess the long-term safety and efficacy of cervical disc replacement with the Prestige Cervical Disc in a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial at 7 years of follow-up.

Methods

At 31 investigational sites, 541 patients with single-level cervical disc disease with radiculopathy were randomized to 1 of 2 treatment groups: 276 investigational group patients underwent anterior cervical discectomy and arthroplasty with the Prestige disc, and 265 control group patients underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Clinical outcomes included Neck Disability Index, the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, and neck and arm pain scores. Radiographs were assessed for angle of motion and fusion. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were evaluated preoperatively, intraoperatively, and at 1.5, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 60, and 84 months.

Results

Of the 541 patients treated, 395 patients (73%; 212 investigational and 183 control patients) completed 7 years of clinical follow-up. Significant improvements achieved by 1.5 months in both groups were sustained at 7 years. In the investigational group, mean Neck Disability Index improvements from preoperative scores were 38.2 and 37.5 at 60 and 84 months, respectively. In the control group, the corresponding means were 33.8 and 31.9. The differences between the investigational and control groups at the 60-month and 84-month periods were significant (p = 0.014 and 0.002, respectively). The overall rates of maintenance or improvement in neurological status in the investigational group were significantly higher: 92.2% and 88.2% at 60 months and 84 months, respectively, compared with 85.7% and 79.7% in the control group (p = 0.017 and 0.011, respectively). At 84 months, the percentage of working patients in the investigational group was 73.9%, and in the control group, 73.1%. Postoperatively, the implant effectively maintained average angular motion of 6.67° at 60 months and 6.75° at 84 months. Cumulative rates for surgery at the index level were lower (p < 0.001) in the investigational group (11 [4.8%] of 276) when compared with the control group (29 [13.7%] of 265) (based on life-table method), and there were statistical differences between the investigational and control groups with specific regard to the rate of subsequent revision and supplemental fixation surgical procedures. Rates for additional surgical procedures that involved adjacent levels were lower in the investigational group than in the control group (11 [4.6%] of 276 vs 24 [11.9%] of 265, respectively).

Conclusions

Cervical disc arthroplasty has the potential for preserving motion at the operated level while providing biomechanical stability and global neck mobility and may result in a reduction in adjacent-segment degeneration. The Prestige Cervical Disc maintains improved clinical outcomes and segmental motion after implantation at 7-year follow-up. Clinical trial registration no. NCT00642876 (ClinicalTrials.gov).