Dynamics of improvement following total lumbar disc replacement: Is the outcome predictable?

Spine

Volumn 34, Issue 23, 2009, Pages 2579-2586

  Siepe, Christoph J ^a   Tepass, Alexander ^b   Hitzl, Wolfgang ^b   Meschede, Peter ^a   Beisse, Rudolph ^a   Korge, Andreas ^a   Mayer, H Michael ^a  

^a Spine Center   (Germany)

^b PARACELSUS MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Austria)

Author keywords

Clinical results; Disc arthroplasty; Lumbar disc replacement; Outcome; Outcome predictability; Prognostic factors; Prospective studies

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; DETERIORATION; DYNAMICS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK DEGENERATION; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR DISK; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE CARE; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; SPINE SURGERY; TOTAL LUMBAR DISC REPLACEMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK DEGENERATION; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENT SELECTION; PROGNOSIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 70449493203     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b612bd     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Blumenthal S, 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 CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion. Part I: evaluation of clinical outcomes. Spine 2005;30: 1565-75; discussion E387-91.
2. 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;31:1923-1932
3. Zigler J, Delamarter R, Spivak JM, et al. Results of the prospective, randomized, 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. Sasso RC, Foulk DM, Hahn M. Prospective, randomized trial of metal-onmetal artificial lumbar disc replacement: initial results for treatment of discogenic pain. Spine 2008;33:123-131
5. David T. Long-term results of one-level lumbar arthroplasty: minimum 10- year follow-up of the CHARITE artificial disc in 106 patients. Spine 2007; 32:661-666
6. Lemaire JP, Carrier H, Ali el HS, et al. Clinical and radiological outcomes with the Charite artificial disc: a 10-year minimum follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005;18:353-359
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. Delamarter RB, Fribourg DM, Kanim LE, et al. ProDisc artificial total lumbar disc replacement: introduction and early results from the United States clinical trial. Spine 2003;28:S167-75.
9. Le Huec JC, Basso Y, Aunoble S, et al. Influence of facet and posterior muscle degeneration on clinical results of lumbar total disc replacement: two-year follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005;18:219-223
10. McAfee PC, Fedder IL, Saiedy S, et al. SB Charite disc replacement: report of 60 prospective randomized cases in a US center. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003; 16:424-433
11. Anderson PA, Schwaegler PE, Cizek D, et al. Work status as a predictor of surgical outcome of discogenic low back pain. Spine 2006;31:2510-2515
12. Du Bois M, Donceel P. A screening questionnaire to predict no return to work within 3 months for low back pain claimants. Eur Spine J 2008;17: 380-385
13. Hagg O, Fritzell P, Ekselius L, et al. Predictors of outcome in fusion surgery for chronic low back pain. A report from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study. Eur Spine J 2003;12:22-33. (Pubitemid 36286827)
14. Hakkinen A, Ylinen J, Kautiainen H, et al. Does the outcome 2 months after lumbar disc surgery predict the outcome 12 months later? Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:968-972
15. Peolsson A, Vavruch L, Oberg B. Can the results 6 months after anterior cervical decompression and fusion identify patients who will have remaining deficit at long-term? Disabil Rehabil 2006;28:117-124
16. Saberi H, Isfahani AV. Higher preoperative Oswestry Disability Index is associated with better surgical outcome in upper lumbar disc herniations. Eur Spine J 2008;17:117-121
17. Enthoven P, Skargren E, Carstensen J, et al. Predictive factors for 1-year and 5-year outcome for disability in a working population of patients with low back pain treated in primary care. Pain 2006;122:137-144
18. Hakkinen A, Kautiainen H, Jarvenpaa S, et al. Changes in the total Oswestry Index and its ten items in females and males pre- and post-surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a 1-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 2007;16:347-352
19. Mannion AF, Elfering A. Predictors of surgical outcome and their assessment. Eur Spine J 2006;15(suppl 1):S93-108.
20. Miettinen T, Leino E, Airaksinen O, et al. The possibility to use simple validated questionnaires to predict long-term health problems after whiplash injury. Spine 2004;29:E47-51.
21. Peolsson A, Peolsson M. Predictive factors for long-term outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion: a multivariate data analysis. Eur Spine J 2008;17:406-414
22. Woertgen C, Rothoerl RD, Breme K, et al. Variability of outcome after lumbar disc surgery. Spine 1999;24:807-811
23. Junge A, Frohlich M, Ahrens S, et al. Predictors of bad and good outcome of lumbar spine surgery. A prospective clinical study with 2 years' follow up. Spine 1996;21:1056-64, discussion 64-65
24. Lawrence JT, London N, Bohlman HH, et al. Preoperative narcotic use as a predictor of clinical outcome: results following anterior cervical arthrodesis. Spine 2008;33:2074-2078
25. Huang RC, Lim MR, Girardi FP, et al. The prevalence of contraindications to total disc replacement in a cohort of lumbar surgical patients. Spine 2004; 29:2538-2541
26. McAfee PC. The indications for lumbar and cervical disc replacement. Spine J 2004;4:177S-81.
27. Wong DA, Annesser B, Birney T, et al. Incidence of contraindications to total disc arthroplasty: a retrospective review of 100 consecutive fusion patients with a specific analysis of facet arthrosis. Spine J 2007;7:5-11.
28. Chin KR. Epidemiology of indications and contraindications to total disc replacement in an academic practice. Spine J 2007;7:392-398
29. Datta JC, Janssen ME, Beckham R, et al. The use of computed tomography angiography to define the prevertebral vascular anatomy prior to anterior lumbar procedures. Spine 2007;32:113-119
30. Carragee EJ, Chen Y, Tanner CM, et al. Can discography cause long-term back symptoms in previously asymptomatic subjects? Spine 2000;25: 1803-1808
31. Carragee EJ, Tanner CM, Yang B, et al. False-positive findings on lumbar discography. Reliability of subjective concordance assessment during provocative disc injection. Spine 1999;24:2542-2547
32. Block AR, Vanharanta H, Ohnmeiss DD, et al. Discographic pain report. Influence of psychological factors. Spine 1996;21:334-338
33. Mayer HM, Wiechert K. Microsurgical anterior approaches to the lumbar spine for interbody fusion and total disc replacement. Neurosurgery 2002; 51:S159-65.
34. 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):S124 -30.
35. Bertagnoli R, Marnay T, Mayer HM, eds. The ProDisc Book. Tuttlingen, Germany: Spine Solutions GmbH; 2003.
36. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, et al. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 1980;66:271-273
37. Hill T, Lewicki P. Statistiks: Methods and Applications. Tulsa, OK: StatSoft Inc.; 2007.
38. Zindrick MR, Tzermiadianos MN, Voronov LI, et al. An evidence-based medicine approach in determining factors that may affect outcome in lumbar total disc replacement. Spine 2008;33:1262-1269
39. 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.
40. Little DG, MacDonald D. The use of the percentage change in Oswestry Disability Index score as an outcome measure in lumbar spinal surgery. Spine 1994;19:2139-2143
41. Tafazal SI, Sell PJ. Outcome scores in spinal surgery quantified: excellent, good, fair and poor in terms of patient-completed tools. Eur Spine J 2006; 15:1653-1660
42. Copay AG, Subach BR, Glassman SD, et al. Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J 2007;7:541-546
43. Rohan MX Jr, Ohnmeiss DD, Guyer RD, et al. Relationship between the length of time off work preoperatively and clinical outcome at 24-month follow-up in patients undergoing total disc replacement or fusion. Spine J 2009;9:360-365
44. McAfee PC, Cunningham B, Holsapple G, et al. A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion. Part II: evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcomes. Spine 2005; 30:1576-83; discussion E388-90.
45. 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): S106-10.
46. Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Shah RV, et al. The treatment of disabling multilevel lumbar discogenic low back pain with total disc arthroplasty utilizing the ProDisc prosthesis: a prospective study with 2-year minimum follow-up. Spine 2005;30:2192-2199 (Pubitemid 41429200)
47. Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Shah RV, et al. The treatment of disabling single-level lumbar discogenic low back pain with total disc arthroplasty utilizing the ProDisc prosthesis: a prospective study with 2-year minimum follow-up. Spine 2005;30:2230-2236 (Pubitemid 41429207)
48. Siepe CJ, Mayer HM, Heinz-Leisenheimer M, et al. Total lumbar disc replacement: different results for different levels. Spine 2007;32:782-790
49. Tropiano P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, et al. Lumbar disc replacement: preliminary results with ProDisc II after a minimum follow-up period of 1 year. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:362-368
50. Geisler FH, Guyer RD, Blumenthal SL, et al. Patient selection for lumbar arthroplasty and arthrodesis: the effect of revision surgery in a controlled, multicenter, randomized study. J Neurosurg Spine 2008;8:13-16
51. McCormick PC. Lumbar disc arthroplasty compared with interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 2008;8:3-5; discussion 5-6.
52. Pettine K, Donner EJ. Why lumbar Artificial Disc Replacements (ADR) fail: home run or strike out? Spine J 2008;8(suppl):11S. Paper presented at: 23rd Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Society (NASS); October 8-15, 2008; Toronto, Ontario.
53. 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.
54. Putzier M, Funk JF, Schneider SV, et al. Charite total disc replacementclinical and radiographical results after an average follow-up of 17 years. Eur Spine J 2006;15:183-195
55. 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-A:490-496
56. Cakir B, Richter M, Kafer W, et al. The impact of total lumbar disc replacement on segmental and total lumbar lordosis. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2005;20:357-364
57. Liu J, Ebraheim NA, Haman SP, et al. Effect of the increase in the height of lumbar disc space on facet joint articulation area in sagittal plane. Spine 2006;31:E198-202.
58. Park CK, Ryu KS, Jee WH. Degenerative changes of discs and facet joints in lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc II: minimum two-year followup. Spine 2008;33:1755-1761
59. Sarialiel H, Lemaire JP, Pascal-Mousselard H, et al. In vivo study of the kinematics in axial rotation of the lumbar spine after total intervertebral disc replacement: long-term results: a 10-14 years follow up evaluation. Eur Spine J 2006;15:1501-1510
60. Shim CS, Lee SH, Shin HD, et al. CHARITE versus ProDisc: a comparative study of a minimum 3-year follow-up. Spine 2007;32:1012-1018
61. Chen SH, Zhong ZC, Chen CS, et al. Biomechanical comparison between lumbar disc arthroplasty and fusion. Med Eng Phys 2009;31:244-253
62. Denoziere G, Ku DN. Biomechanical comparison between fusion of two vertebrae and implantation of an artificial intervertebral disc. J Biomech 2006;39:766-775
63. 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.
64. 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;30:2755-2764
65. 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.
66. Rohlmann A, Zander T, Bergmann G. Effect of total disc replacement with ProDisc on intersegmental rotation of the lumbar spine. Spine 2005; 30:738-743
67. Rousseau MA, Bradford DS, Bertagnoli R, et al. Disc arthroplasty design influences intervertebral kinematics and facet forces. Spine J 2006;6: 258-266
68. Cunningham BW, Gordon JD, Dmitriev AE, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of total disc replacement arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine 2003;28:S110-7.