Cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) represents a relatively novel procedure intended to address some of the shortcomings associated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) by preserving motion at the treated level. This prospective, randomized, multicenter study evaluates the safety and efficacy of a new metal-on-metal CTDR implant (Kineflex|C) by comparing it with ACDF in the treatment of single-level spondylosis with radiculopathy.
The study was a prospective, randomized US FDA Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) pivotal trial conducted at 21 centers across the US. The primary clinical outcome measures included the Neck Disability Index (NDI), visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and a composite measure of clinical success. Patients were randomized to CTDR using the Kineflex|C (SpinalMotion, Inc.) cervical artificial disc or ACDF using structural allograft and an anterior plate.
A total of 269 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either CTDR (136 patients) or to ACDF (133 patients). There were no significant differences between the CTDR and ACDF groups when comparing operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, or the reoperation rate at the index level. The overall success rate was significantly greater in the CTDR group (85%) compared with the ACDF group (71%) (p = 0.05). In both groups, the mean NDI scores improved significantly by 6 weeks after surgery and remained significantly improved throughout the 24-month follow-up (p < 0.0001). Similarly, the VAS pain scores improved significantly by 6 weeks and remained significantly improved through the 24-month follow-up (p < 0.0001). The range of motion (ROM) in the CTDR group decreased at 3 months but was significantly greater than the preoperative mean at 12- and 24-month follow-up. The ROM in the ACDF group was significantly reduced by 3 months and remained so throughout the follow-up. Adjacent-level degeneration was also evaluated in both groups from preoperatively to 2-year follow-up and was classified as none, mild, moderate, or severe. Preoperatively, there were no significant differences between groups when evaluating the different levels of adjacent-level degeneration. At the 2-year follow-up, there were significantly more patients in the ACDF group with severe adjacent-level radiographic changes (p < 0.0001). However, there were no significant differences between groups in adjacent-level reoperation rate (7.6% for the Kineflex|C group and 6.1% for the ACDF group).
Cervical total disc replacement allows for neural decompression and clinical results comparable to ACDF. Kineflex|C was associated with a significantly greater overall success rate than fusion while maintaining motion at the index level. Furthermore, there were significantly fewer Kineflex|C patients showing severe adjacent-level radiographic changes at the 2-year follow-up. These results from a prospective, randomized study support that Kineflex|C CTDR is a viable alternative to ACDF in select patients with cervical radiculopathy.
Abbreviations used in this paper: ACDF = anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; AP = anteroposterior; CTDR = cervical total disc replacement; IDE = investigational device exemption; NDI = neck disability index; ROM = range of motion; VAS = visual analog scale.
BohlmanHHEmerySEGoodfellowDBJonesPK: Robinson anterior cervical discectomy and arthrodesis for cervical radiculopathy. Long-term follow-up of one hundred and twenty-two patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am75:1298–13071993
BurkusJKHaidRWTraynelisVCMummaneniPV: Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc replacement with the Prestige disc: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine13:308–3182010
ChangUKKimDHLeeMCWillenbergRKimSHLimJ: Changes in adjacent-level disc pressure and facet joint force after cervical arthroplasty compared with cervical discectomy and fusion. J Neurosurg Spine7:33–392007
CoricDCassisJCarewJDBoltesMO: Prospective study of cervical arthroplasty in 98 patients involved in 1 of 3 separate investigational device exemption studies from a single investigational site with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine13:715–7212010
DmitrievAECunninghamBWHuNSellGVignaFMcAfeePC: Adjacent level intradiscal pressure and segmental kinematics following a cervical total disc arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976)30:1165–11722005
EmerySEBohlmanHHBolestaMJJonesPK: Anterior cervical decompression and arthrodesis for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Two to seventeen-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am80:941–9511998
GoffinJVan CalenberghFvan LoonJCaseyAKehrPLiebigKE: Intermediate follow-up after treatment of degenerative disc disease with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis: single-level and bi-level. Spine (Phila Pa 1976)28:2673–26782003
HellerJGSassoRCPapadopoulosSMAndersonPAFesslerRGHackerRJ: Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976)34:101–1072009
KulkarniVRajshekharVRaghuramL: Accelerated spondylotic changes adjacent to the fused segment following central cervical corpectomy: magnetic resonance imaging study evidence. J Neurosurg100:1 Suppl Spine2–62004
MurreyDJanssenMDelamarterRGoldsteinJZiglerJTayB: 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 J9:275–2862009
WalraevensJLiuBMeersschaertJDemaerelPDelyeHDepreitereB: Qualitative and quantitative assessment of degeneration of cervical intervertebral discs and facet joints. Eur Spine J18:358–3692009. (Erratum in Eur Spine J 18: 370 2009)
WigfieldCGillSNelsonRLangdonIMetcalfNRobertsonJT: Influence of an artificial cervical joint compared with fusion on adjacent-level motion in the treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. J Neurosurg96:1 Suppl17–212002
WigfieldCCSkrzypiecDJackowskiAAdamsMA: Internal stress distribution in cervical intervertebral discs: the influence of an artificial cervical joint and simulated anterior interbody fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech16:441–4492003
YueWMBrodnerWHighlandTR: Long-term results after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with allograft and plating: a 5- to 11-year radiologic and clinical follow-up study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976)30:2138–21442005