Posterior component impingement after lumbar total disc replacement: A radiographic analysis of 66 ProDisc-L prostheses in 56 patients

Spine

Volumn 33, Issue 22, 2008, Pages 2444-2449

  Käfer, Wolfram ^a   Clessienne, Charlotte B ^a   Däxle, Manuel ^a   Kocak, Tugrul ^a   Reichel, Heiko ^a   Cakir, Balkan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ULM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Polyethylene (PE) wear; Posterior component impingement; Segmental angulation; Total disc replacement (TDR)

Indexed keywords

POLYETHYLENE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BODY POSITION; BONE PROSTHESIS; CLINICAL EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMPLANTATION; LORDOSIS; LUMBAR TOTAL DISC REPLACEMENT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS LOOSENING; RADIODIAGNOSIS; RANGE OF MOTION; SPINAL CORD COMPRESSION; SPINE MOBILITY; SPINE SURGERY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; INSTRUMENTATION; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; INTERVERTEBRAL DISKECTOMY; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROSTHESES AND ORTHOSES; PROSTHESIS; RADIOGRAPHY;

ADULT; DISKECTOMY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POLYETHYLENE; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 58149184327     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318182c37b     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Tropiano P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, et al. Lumbar total disc replacement. Seven to eleven-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005;87:490-6.
2. Mayer HM. Total lumbar disc replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005;87: 1029-37.
3. Zigler J, Delamarter R, Spivak JM, et al. Results of the prospective, random- ized, multicenter Food. and. Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement versus circumferential fusion for the treatment of 1-level degenerative disc disease. Spine 2007;32: 1155-62; discussion 63.
4. 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(Suppl2):S131-6.
5. Shim CS, Lee SH, Shin HD, et al. CHARITE versus ProDisc: a comparative study of a minimum 3-year follow-up. Spine 2007;32:1012-8.
6. Siepe CJ, Mayer HM, Wiechert K, et al. Clinical results of total lumbar disc replacement with ProDisc II: three-year results for different indications. Spine 2006;31:1923-32.
7. Auerbach JD, Wills BP, Mclntosh TC, et al. Evaluation of spinal kinematics following lumbar total disc replacement and circumferential fusion using in vivo fluoroscopy. Spine 2007;32:527-36.
8. Cakir B, Richter M, Käfer W, et al. The impact of total lumbar disc replacement on segmental and total lumbar lordosis. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2005;20:357-64.
9. Cakir B, Schmidt R, Huch K, et al. Sagittales Alignement und segmentale Beweglichkeit nach endoprothetischer Versorgung lumbaler Bewegungsseg-mente. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 2004;142:159-65.
10. van Ooij A, Kurtz SM, Stessels F, et al. Polyethylene wear debris and long-term clinical failure of the Charite disc prosthesis: a study of 4 patients. Spine 2007;32:223-9.
11. Kurtz SM, Peloza J, Siskey R, et al. Analysis of a retrieved polyethylene total disc replacement component. Spine J 2005;5:344-50.
12. Kurtz SM, van Ooij A, Ross R, et al. Polyethylene wear and rim fracture in total disc arthroplasty. Spine J 2007;7:12-21.
13. 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.
14. Punt IM, Visser VM, van Rhijn LW, et al. Complications and reoperations of the SB Charite lumbar disc prosthesis: experience in 75 patients. Eur Spine J 2008;17:36-43.
15. Cakir B, Richter M, Puhl W, et al. Reliability of motion measurements after total disc replacement: the spike and the fin method. Eur Spine J 2006;15: 165-73.
16. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;l:307-10.
17. David T. Revision of a Charite artificial disc 9.5 years in vivo to a new Charite artificial disc: case report and explant analysis. Eur Spine J 2005 ;14: 507-11.
18. 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.
19. McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Devine J, et al. Classification of heterotopic ossification (HO) in artificial disk replacement. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003; 16:384-9.
20. Shim CS, Lee S, Maeng DH, et al. Vertical split fracture of the vertebral body following total disc replacement using ProDisc: report of two cases. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005;l 8:465-9.
21. Siepe CJ, Korge A, Grochulla F, et al. Analysis of post-operative pain patterns following total lumbar disc replacement: results from fluoroscopically guided spine infiltrations. Eur Spine J 2008;17:44-56.
22. Siepe CJ, Mayer HM, Heinz-Leisenheimer M, et al. Total lumbar disc replacement: different results for different levels. Spine 2007;32:782-90.
23. Lim MR, Girardi FP, Zhang K, et al. Measurement of total disc replacement radiographic range of motion: a comparison of two techniques. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005;18:252-6.
24. Lim MR, Loder RT, Huang RC, et al. Measurement error of lumbar total disc replacement range of motion. Spine 2006;31:E291-7.
25. Gstoettner M, Sekyra K, Walochnik N, et al. Inter- and intraobserver reliability assessment of the Cobb angle: manual versus digital measurement tools. Eur Spine J 2007;16:1587-92.
26. Cakir B, Richter M, Käfer W, et al. Evaluation of lumbar spine motion with dynamic x-ray - a reliability analysis. Spine 2006;31:1258-64.
27. Rohlmann A, Zander T, Bergmann G. Effect of total disc replacement with ProDisc on inter segmental rotation of the lumbar spine. Spine 2005; 30:738-43.
28. Goel VK, Grauer JN, Patel T, et al. Effects of charite artificial disc on the implanted and adjacent spinal segments mechanics using a hybrid testing protocol. Spine 2005;30:2755-64.
29. McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Hayes V, et al. Biomechanical analysis of rotational motions after disc arthroplasty: implications for patients with adult deformities. Spine 2006;31:S152-60.
30. German JW, Foley KT. Disc arthroplasty in the management of the painful lumbar motion segment. Spine 2005;30:S60-7.
31. Huang RC, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP Jr, et al. Correlation between range of motion and outcome after lumbar total disc replacement: 8.6-year follow-up. Spine 2005;30:1407-11.
32. Panjabi M, Henderson G, Abjornson C, et al. Multidirectional testing of one-and two-level ProDisc-L versus simulated fusions. Spine 2007;32:1311-9.
33. Dooris AP, Goel VK, Grosland NM, et al. Load-sharing between anterior and posterior elements in a lumbar motion segment implanted with an artificial disc. Spine 2001;26:E122-9.