Revisability of the CHARITÉ Artificial Disc replacement: Analysis of 688 patients enrolled in the U.S. IDE study of the CHARITÉ Artificial Disc

Spine

Volumn 31, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 1217-1226

  McAfee, Paul C ^a,e   Geisler, Fred H ^b   Saiedy, Samer S ^a   Moore, Sandra V ^c   Regan, John J ^d   Guyer, Richard D ^c   Blumenthal, Scott L ^c   Fedder, Ira L ^a   Tortolani, P Justin ^a   Cunningham, Bryan ^a  

^a St Joseph's Hospital   (United States)

^b Illinois Neuro Spine Center   (United States)

^c TEXAS BACK INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d Pacific Coast Spine Institute   (United States)

^e Scoliosis and Spine Center   (United States)

Author keywords

Artificial disc; IDE trial; Lumbar fusion; Lumbar spine; Randomized study; Reoperations; Revisions; Total disc replacement

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTHRODESIS; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; BONE ATROPHY; BONE PROSTHESIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HUMAN; IATROGENIC DISEASE; INSTRUMENTATION; JOINT MOBILITY; LUMBAR SPINE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; NEUROLOGIC DISEASE; PEDICLE SCREW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REOPERATION; SPINE FUSION; SPINE INSTABILITY; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; SURGICAL APPROACH; UNITED STATES; COMPARATIVE STUDY; INCIDENCE; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK HERNIA; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; PROSTHESES AND ORTHOSES; RADIOGRAPHY; SURVIVAL;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK DISPLACEMENT; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; REOPERATION; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33646767805     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000217689.08487.a8     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Scott-Young M. Revision strategies for lumbar disc replacement. Spine J 2004;4(suppl):115.
2. Zeegers WS, Bohnen LM, Laaper M, et al. Artificial disc replacement with the modular type SB Charite III: 2-year results in 50 prospectively studied patients. Eur Spine J 1999;8:210-7.
3. van Ooij A, Oner FC, Verbout AJ. Complications of artificial disc replacement: a report of 27 patients with the SB Charite disc. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:369-83.
4. Lemaire JP. SB Charité III intervertebral disc prosthesis: biomechanical, clinical, and radiological correlations with a series of 100 cases over a follow-up of more than 10 years [in French]. Rachis 2002;14:271-85.
5. Lemaire JP, Skalli W, Lavaste F, et al. Intervertebral disc prosthesis: results and prospects for the year 2000. Clin Orthop 1997:64-76.
6. David T. Lumbar disc prosthesis: five years follow-up study on 96 patients. Presented at the 15th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Society, New Orleans, 2000.
7. Cinotti G, David T, Postacchini F. Results of disc prosthesis after a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. Spine 1996;21:995-1000.
8. Griffith SL, Shelokov AP, Buttner-Janz K, et al. A multicenter retrospective study of the clinical results of the LINK SB Charite intervertebral prosthesis: the initial European experience. Spine 1994;19:1842-9.
9. Aunoble S, Donkersloot P, Le Huec JC. Dislocations with intervertebral disc prosthesis: two case reports. Eur Spine J 2004;13:464-8.
10. David T. Revision of a Charité Artificial Disc 9.5 years in vivo to a new Charité Artificial Disc: case report and explant analysis. Eur Spine J 2005;14:507-11.
11. McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Lee GA, et al. Revision strategies for salvaging or improving failed cylindrical cages. Spine 1999;24:2147-53.
12. Schwender JD, Denis F, Garvey DA, et al. Revision lumbar arthrodesis for the treatment of cylindrical cage pseudarthrosis: perioperative complications and pitfalls. 16th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Society, Seattle, 2001.
13. Zheng F, Cammisa FP Jr, Sandhu HS, et al. Factors predicting hospital stay, operative time, blood loss, and transfusion in patients undergoing revision posterior lumbar spine decompression, fusion, and segmental instrumentation. Spine 2002;27:818-24.
14. Greiner-Perth R, Boehm H, Allam Y, et al. Reoperation rate after instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a report on 1680 cases. Spine 2004;29:2516-20.
15. Cook S, Asher M, Lai SM, et al. Reoperation after primary posterior instrumentation and fusion for idiopathic scoliosis: toward defining late operative site pain of unknown cause. Spine 2000;25:463-8.
16. Albert TJ, Pinto M, Denis F. Management of symptomatic lumbar pseudarthrosis with anteroposterior fusion: a functional and radiographic outcome study. Spine 2000;25:123-30.
17. Gertzbein SD, Hollopeter MR, Hall S. Pseudarthrosis of the lumbar spine: outcome after circumferential fusion. Spine 1998;23:2352-7.
18. Brantigan JW. Pseudarthrosis rate after allograft posterior lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw and plate fixation. Spine 1994;19:1271-80.
19. Blumenthal SL, McAfee PC, Guyer RD, et al. A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemptions study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITÉ Artificial Disc versus lumbar fusion: I. Evaluation of clinical outcomes. Spine 2005;30:1565-75.
20. McAfee PC, Cunningham B, Holsapple GA, et al. A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemptions study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITÉ Artificial Disc versus lumbar fusion: II. Evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcomes. Spine 2005;30:1576-83.
21. Buttner-Janz K, Hochshuler SH, McAfee PC. The Artificial Disk. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2003.
22. 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 Charite intervertebral disc. J Neurosurg Spine 2004;1:143-54.
23. 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.
24. McAfee PC. Artificial disc prosthesis: the Link SB Charite. In: Kaech DL, Jinkins JR, eds. Spinal Rehabilitation Procedures. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, 2002;299-310.
25. McAfee PC, Geisler FH, Scott-Young M, eds. Roundtables in Spine Surgery: Complications and Revision Strategies in Lumbar Spine Arthroplasty. www. qualitymedicalpublishing.com/ssrtables.php (priority code: dpssrt). St. Louis: Quality Medical, 2005.
26. McAfee PC. Comments on the van Ooij article. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005;18:116-7.
27. Scott-Young M. Strategy for revision disc replacement surgery. In: McAfee PC, Geisler FH, Scott-Young M, eds. Roundtables in Spine Surgery: Complications & Revision Strategies in Lumbar Spine Arthroplasty. St. Louis: Quality Medical, 2005:23-71.
28. Thalgott JS, Giuffre JM, Klezl Z, et al. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion with titanium mesh cages, coralline hydroxyapatite, and demineralized bone matrix as part of a circumferential fusion. Spine J 2002;2:63-9.
29. Cunningham BW, Godron JD, Dmitriev AE, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of total disc replacement arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine 2003;28(suppl):110-7.
30. McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Orbegoso CM, et al. Analysis of porous ingrowth in intervertebral disc prostheses: a nonhuman primate model. Spine 2003;28:332-40.
31. Rauschning W. Pathoanatomy of lumbar disc degeneration and stenosis. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1993;251:3-12.
32. Brau SA, Delamarter RB, Schiffman ML, et al. Vascular injury during anterior lumbar surgery. Spine J 2004;4:409-12.
33. Mathew P, Blackman M, Redla S, et al. Bilateral pedicle fractures following anterior dislocation of the polyethylene inlay of a ProDisc artificial disc replacement: a case report of an unusual complication. Spine 2005;30:E311-4.
34. Kuslich SD, Ulstrom CL, Griffith SL, et al. The Bagby and Kuslich method of lumbar interbody fusion: history, techniques, and 2-year follow-up results of a United States prospective, multicenter trial. Spine 1998;23:1267-79.
35. McAfee PC, Boden SD, Brantigan JW, et al. Symposium. A critical discrepancy: criteria of successful arthrodesis following interbody spinal fusions. Spine 2001;26:320-34.
36. McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Holtsapple G, et al. A prospective, randomized, multi-center FDA IDE study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITÉ Artificial Disc vs. lumbar fusion: II. Evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcomes. Spine 2005;30:1576-84.
37. Hallab NJ, Cunningham BW, Jacobs JJ. Spinal implant debris-induced osteolysis. Spine 2003;28(suppl):125-38.
38. Duffy P, Sher JL, Partington PF. Premature wear and osteolysis in an HA-coated, uncemented total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004;86:34-8.
39. Joshi RP, Eftekhar NS, McMahon DJ, et al. Osteolysis after Charnley primary low-friction arthroplasty: a comparison of two matched paired groups. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998;80:585-90.
40. Bradford L, Kurland R, Sankaran M, et al. Early failure due to osteolysis associated with contemporary highly cross-linked ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86:1051-6.
41. Han CD, Choe WS, Yoo JH. Effect of polyethylene wear on osteolysis in cementless primary total hip arthroplasty: minimal 5-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty 1999;14:714-23.
42. Maloney WJ, Galante JO, Anderson M, et al. Fixation, polyethylene wear, and pelvic osteolysis in primary total hip replacement. Clin Orthop 1999:157-64.
43. Orishimo KF, Claus AM, Sychterz CJ, et al. Relationship between polyethylene wear and osteolysis in hips with a second-generation porous-coated cementless cup after seven years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003;85:1095-9.
44. Yoon TR, Rowe SM, Jung ST, et al. Osteolysis in association with a total hip arthroplasty with ceramic bearing surfaces. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998;80:1459-68.
45. Perez RE, Rodriguez JA, Deshmukh RG, et al. Polyethylene wear and periprosthetic osteolysis in metal-backed acetabular components with cylindrical liners. J Arthroplasty 1998;13:1-7.
46. Scholl E, Eggli S, Ganz R. Osteolysis in cemented titanium alloy hip prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 2000;15:570-5.
47. Kim YH, Oh JH, Oh SH. Osteolysis around cementless porous-coated anatomic knee prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995;77:236-41.
48. Szuszczewicz ES, Schmalzried TP, Petersen TD. Progressive bilateral pelvic osteolysis in a patient with McKee-Farrar metal-metal total hip prostheses. J Arthroplasty 1997;12:819-24.
49. Huang CH, Ma HM, Liau JJ, et al. Osteolysis in failed total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing knees. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002;84:2224-9.
50. Engh GA, Ammeen DJ. Periprosthetic osteolysis with total knee arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect 2001;50:391-8.
51. Archibeck MJ, Jacobs JJ, Roebuck KA, et al. The basic science of periprosthetic osteolysis. Instr Course Lect 2001;50:185-95.
52. Fraser RD, Ross ER, Lowery GL, et al. AcroFlex design and results. Spine J 2004;4(suppl):245-51.
53. Engh CA Jr, Sychterz CJ, Young AM, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver variability in radiographic assessment of osteolysis. J Arthroplasty 2002;17:752-9.
54. Claus AM, Engh CA Jr, Sychterz CJ, et al. Radiographic definition of pelvic osteolysis following total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003;85:1519-26.
55. Schwarz EM, Campbell D, Totterman S, et al. Use of volumetric computerized tomography as a primary outcome measure to evaluate drug efficacy in the prevention of peri-prosthetic osteolysis: a 1-year clinical pilot of etanercept vs. placebo. J Orthop Res 2003;21:1049-55.
56. Zimlich RH, Fehring TK. Underestimation of pelvic osteolysis: the value of the iliac oblique radiograph. J Arthroplasty 2000;15:796-801.