Disc arthroplasty in the management of the painful lumbar motion segment

Spine

Volumn 30, Issue 16 SUPPL., 2005, Pages

  German, John W ^a   Foley, Kevin T ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER   (United States)

^b SEMMES MURPHEY NEUROLOGIC AND SPINE INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Adjacent segment degeneration; Arthroplasty; Disc replacement; Lumbar disc disease

Indexed keywords

ARTHROPLASTY; DEVICE; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR SPINE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PAINFUL LUMBAR MOTION SEGMENT; PALLIATIVE THERAPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SPINE DISEASE; SPINE FUSION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 23944487182     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000174511.66830.e9     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Benzel EC. Biomechanics of Spine Stabilization, 2nd ed. Rolling Meadows, IL: AANS, 2001:483-7.
2. Slosar PJ. Indications and outcomes of reconsttuctive surgery in chronic pain of spinal origin. Spine 2002;27:2555-62.
3. Christensen FB, Hansen ES, Laursen M, et al. Long-rerm functional outcome of pedicle screw instrumentation as a support for posterolateral spinal fusion. Spine 2002;27:1269-77.
4. Fritzell P, Hägg O, Wessberg P, et al. Chronic low back pain and fusion. A comparison of three surgical techniques: a prospective multicenter randomized study from the Swedish lumbar spine study group. Spine 2002;27: 1131-41.
5. Burkus JK, Transfeldt EE, Kitchel SH, et al. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Spine 2002;27:2396-408.
6. Burkus JK, Heim SE, Gornet MF, et al. Is INFUSE bone graft superior to autogtaft bone? An integrated analysis of clinical trials using the LT-CAGE lumbar tapered fusion device. J Spinal Disord 2003;16:113-22.
7. Gillet P. The fate of the adjacent motion segments after lumbar fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:338-45.
8. Park P, Garton HJ, Gala VC, et al. Adjacent segment disease after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: review of the literature. Spine 2004;29:1938-44.
9. Keller A, Brox JI, Gunderson R, et al. Trunk muscle strength, cross sectional area, and density in patients with chronic low back pain randomized to lumbar fusion or cognitive intervention and exercises. Spine 2004;29:3-8.
10. Sihvonen T, Herno A, Paljiarvi L, et al. Local denervation atrophy of paraspinal muscles in postoperative failed back syndrome. Spine 1993;18: 575-81.
11. Griffith SL, Shelokov AP, Büttner-Janz K, et al. A multicenter retrospective study of the clinical results of the Link® SB Charité Intervertebral prosthesis: the initial European experience. Spine 1994;19:1842-49.
12. Cinotti G, David T, Postacchini F. Results of disc prosthesis after a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. Spine 1996;21:995-1000.
13. Lemaire JP, Skalli W, Lavaste F, et al. Intervertebral disc prosthesis: results and prospects for the year 2000. Clin Orthop 1997;337:64-76.
14. Marnay T. Lumbar disc replacement: 7-11 year results with ProDisc [Abstr]. Spine J 2002;2:94.
15. Mayer HM, Wiechert K, Korge A, et al. Minimally invasive total disc replacement: surgical technique and preliminary clinical results. Eur Spine J 2002;11(suppl 2):124-30.
16. Bertagnoli R, Kumar S. Indications for full prosthetic disc arthroplasty: a correlation of clinical outcome against a variety of indications. Eur Spine J 2002;11(suppl 2):131-6.
17. Hochschuler SH, Ohnmeiss DD, Guyer RD, et al. Artificial disc: preliminary results of a prospective study in the United States. Eur Spine J 2002;11(suppl. 2):106-10.
18. McAfee PC, Fedder IL, Saiedy S, et al. Experimental design of total disk replacement: experience with a prospective randomized study of the SB Charité. Spine 2003;20(suppl):153-62.
19. Blumenthal SL, Ohnmeiss DD, Guyet RD, et al. Prospective study evaluating total disc replacement: preliminary results. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16: 450-54.
20. Guyer RD, McAfee PC, Hochschuler SH, et al. Prospective randomized study of the Charité artificial disc: data from two investigational centers. Spine J 2004;4(suppl):252-9.
21. Geisler FH, Blumenthal SL, Guyer RD, et al. Neurological complications of lumbar artificial disc replacement and comparison of clinical results with those related to lumbar arthrodesis in the literature: results of a multicenter, prospective, randomized investigational device exemption study of Charité intervertebral disc. J Neurosurg (Spine 2) 2004;1:143-54.
22. Huang R, Girardi F, Cammisa F, et al. Long-term flexion-extension range of motion of the ProDisc I disc prosthesis [Abstr]. Spine J 2002;2:93.
23. Tropiano P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, et al. Preliminary results with proDisc II after a minimum follow-up period of 1 year. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16: 362-8.
24. Zigler JE, Burd TA, Vialle EN, et al. Early results using the ProDisc II: a prospective randomized trial of arthroplasty versus fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:352-61.
25. Zigler JE. Clinical results with ProDisc: European experience and U.S. investigational device exemption study. Spine 2003;28(suppl):163-6.
26. Delamarter RB, Fribourg DM, Kanim LEA, et al. ProDisc artificial total lumbar disc replacement: introduction and early results from the United States clinical trial. Spine 2003;28(suppl):167-75.
27. Mathews HH, Lehuec JC, Friesem T, et al. Design rationale and biomechanics of Maverick total disc arthroplasty with early clinical results. Spine J 2004;4(suppl):268-75.
28. Valdevit A, Errico TJ. Design and evaluation of the Flexicore metal-on-metal intervertebral disc prosthesis. Spine J 2004;4(suppl):276-88.
29. Boden SD, Davis DO, Dina TS, et al. Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects: a prospective investigation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990;72:403-8.
30. Derby R, Howard MW, Grant JM, et al. The ability of pressure controlled discography to predict surgical and non-surgical outcome. Spine 1999;24: 364-71.
31. Madan S, Gundanna H, Harley JM, et al. Does provocative discography screening of discogenic back pain improve surgical outcome? J Spinal Disord Tech 2002;15:245-51.
32. Thalgott JS, Albert TJ, Vaccaro AR, et al. A new classification system for degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine based on magnetic resonance imaging, provocative discography, plain radiographs, and anatomic considerations. Spine J 2004;4(suppl):167-72.
33. van Ooij A, Cumhur Oner F, Verbout AJ. Complications of artificial disc replacement: a report of 27 patients with the SB Charité disc. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:369-83.
34. Huang RC, Lim MR, Girardi FP, et al. The prevalence of contraindications to total disc teplacement in a cohort of lumbar sutgical patients. Spine 2004; 29:2538-41.
35. Fritzell P, Hägg O, Wessberg P, et al. 2001 Volvo award winner in clinical studies. Lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical Treatment for chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled ttial from the Swedish lumbar spine study group. Spine 2001;26:2521-34.
36. Möller H, Hedlund R. Surgery versus conservative management in adult isthmic spondylolisthesis: a prospective randomized study: part 1. Spine 2000;25:1711-15.
37. Brox JI, Sørensen R, Friis A, et al. Randomized clinical trial of lumbar instrumented fusion and cognitive intervention and exercises in patients with chronic low back pain and disc degeneration. Spine 2003;28:1913-21.
38. Fairbank J, Frost H, Wilson-MacDonald J, et al. The MRC Spine Stabilization Trial: a randomized controlled trial to compare surgical stabilization of the lumbar spine versus an intensive rehabilitation programme on outcome in patients with chronic low back pain. 2004 International Lumbar Study Group Meeting.
39. Kostuik JP. Complications and surgical revision for failed disc arthroplasty. Spine J 2004;4(suppl):289-91.