Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc replacement with the Prestige disc: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial

Presented at the 2009 Joint Spine Section Meeting

View More View Less
  • 1 Spine Service, Wilderness Spine Services, The Hughston Clinic, Columbus, Georgia;
  • 2 Atlanta Brain and Spine Care, Atlanta, Georgia;
  • 3 Department of Neurosurgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois; and
  • 4 Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California–San Francisco, California
Restricted access

Purchase Now

USD  $45.00

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $369.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $600.00
Print or Print + Online

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.

Abbreviations used in this paper:IDE = investigational device exemption; LOCF = last observation carried forward; NDI = Neck Disability Index; PCS = Physical Component Summary; SF-36 = 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey.

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $369.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $600.00

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to: J. Kenneth Burkus, M.D., The Hughston Clinic, 6262 Veterans Parkway, Columbus, Georgia, 31908-9517. email: jkb66@knology.net.
  • 1

    Baba H, , Furusawa N, , Imura S, , Kawahara N, , Tsuchiya H, & Tomita K: Late radiographic findings after anterior cervical fusion for spondylotic myeloradiculopathy. Spine 18:21672173, 1993

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Bazaz R, , Lee MJ, & Yoo JU: Incidence of dysphagia after anterior cervical spine surgery: a prospective study. Spine 27:24532458, 2002

  • 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 75:12981307, 1993

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Brown JA, , Havel P, , Ebraheim N, , Greenblatt SH, & Jackson WT: Cervical stabilization by plate and bone fusion. Spine 13:236240, 1988

  • 5

    Cherubino P, , Benazzo F, , Borromeo U, & Perle S: Degenerative arthritis of the adjacent spinal joints following anterior cervical spinal fusion: clinicoradiologic and statistical correlations. Ital J Orthop Traumatol 16:533543, 1990

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Connolly PJ, , Esses SI, & Kostuik JP: Anterior cervical fusion: outcome analysis of patients fused with and without anterior cervical plates. J Spinal Disord 9:202206, 1996

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Cummins BH, , Robertson JT, & Gill SS: Surgical experience with an implanted artificial cervical joint. J Neurosurg 88:943948, 1998

  • 8

    DiAngelo DJ, , Roberston JT, , Metcalf NH, , McVay BJ, & Davis RC: Biomechanical testing of an artificial cervical joint and an anterior cervical plate. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:314323, 2003

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Dmitriev AE, , Cunningham BW, , Hu N, , Sell G, , Vigna F, & McAfee PC: Adjacent level intradiscal pressure and segmental kinematics following a cervical total disc arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine 30:11651172, 2005

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Döhler JR, , Kahn MR, & Hughes SP: Instability of the cervical spine after anterior interbody fusion. A study on its incidence and clinical significance in 21 patients. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 104:247250, 1985

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Eck JC, , Humphreys SC, , Lim TH, , Jeong ST, , Kim JG, & Hodges SD, : Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion. Spine 27:24312434, 2002

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Emery SE, , Bolesta MJ, , Banks MA, & Jones PK: Robinson anterior cervical fusion comparison of the standard and modified techniques. Spine 19:660663, 1994

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Gilad I, & Nissan M: A study of vertebra and disc geometric relations of the human cervical and lumbar spine. Spine 11:154157, 1986

  • 14

    Heller JG, , Sasso RC, , Papadopoulos SM, , Anderson PA, , Fessler RG, & Hacker RJ, : Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Spine 34:101107, 2009

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    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 81:519528, 1999

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Ipsen BJ, , Kim DH, , Jenis LG, , Tromanhauser SG, & Banco RJ: Effect of plate position on clinical outcome after anterior cervical spine surgery. Spine J 7:637642, 2007

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Kim SW, , Limson MA, , Kim SB, , Arbatin JJ, , Chang KY, & Park MS, : Comparison of radiographic changes after ACDF versus Bryan disc arthroplasty in single and bi-level cases. Eur Spine J 18:218231, 2009

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Kulkarni V, , Rajshekhar V, & Raghuram L: Accelerated spondylotic changes adjacent to the fused segment following central cervical corpectomy: magnetic resonance imaging study evidence. J Neurosurg 100:1 Suppl Spine 26, 2004

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Li L: Re: Yang JY, Song HS, Lee M, et al. Adjacent level ossification development after anterior cervical fusion without plate fixation. Spine 2009;34:30–3. Spine 34:16261627, 2009. (Letter)

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Mendoza-Lattes S, , Clifford K, , Bartelt R, , Stewart J, , Clark CR, & Boezaart AP: Dysphagia following anterior cervical arthrodesis is associated with continuous, strong retraction of the esophagus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:256263, 2008

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    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 6:198209, 2007

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Murrey D, , Janssen M, , Delamarter R, , Goldstein J, , Zigler J, & Tay B, : Results of the prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-C total disc replacement versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of 1-level symptomatic cervical disc disease. Spine J 9:275286, 2009

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    Park JB, , Cho YS, & Riew KD: Development of adjacent-level ossification in patients with an anterior cervical plate. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:558563, 2005

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Park JB, , Watthanaaphisit T, & Riew KD: Timing of development of adjacent-level ossification after anterior cervical arthrodesis with plates. Spine J 7:633636, 2007

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25

    Porchet F, & Metcalf NH: Clinical outcomes with the Prestige II cervical disc: preliminary results from a prospective randomized clinical trial. Neurosurg Focus 17:3 E6, 2004

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    Robertson JT, & Metcalf NH: Long-term outcomes after implantation of the PRESTIGE I disc in an end-stage indication: 4-year results from a pilot study. Neurosurg Focus 17:3 E10, 2004

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27

    Smith-Hammond CA, , New KC, , Pietrobon R, , Curtis DJ, , Scharver CH, & Turner DA: Prospective analysis of incidence and risk factors of dysphagia in spine surgery patients: comparison of anterior cervical, posterior cervical, and lumbar procedures. Spine 29:14411446, 2004

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28

    Steinmetz MP, , Patel R, , Traynelis V, , Resnick DK, & Anderson PA: Cervical disc arthroplasty compared with fusion in a workers' compensation population. Neurosurgery 63:741747, 2008

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29

    Wigfield C, , Gill S, , Nelson R, , Langdon I, , Metcalf N, & Robertson J: Influence of an artificial cervical joint compared with fusion on adjacent-level motion in the treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. J Neurosurg 96:1 Suppl 1721, 2002

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30

    Wigfield CC, , Gill SS, , Nelson RJ, , Metcalf NH, & Robertson JT: The new Frenchay artificial cervical joint: results from a two-year pilot study. Spine 27:24462452, 2002

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 1475 350 22
Full Text Views 184 46 2
PDF Downloads 189 34 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0