Kinematics of progressive circumferential ligament resection (decompression) in conjunction with cervical disc arthroplasty in a spondylotic spine model

Spine

Volumn 35, Issue 18, 2010, Pages 1676-1683

  Roberto, Rolando F ^a   McDonald, Thomas ^a   Curtiss, Shane ^a   Neu, Corey P ^b   Kim, Kee ^a   Pennings, Fritz ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

biomechanics; cervical disc arthroplasty; foraminotomy; laminectomy; ProDisc C

Indexed keywords

ARTHROPLASTY; ARTICLE; CADAVER; CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS; HUMAN; KINEMATICS; LAMINECTOMY; LIGAMENT SURGERY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPINAL CORD DECOMPRESSION; SPINE INSTABILITY; SPINE MOBILITY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTHROPLASTY; BIOMECHANICS; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISC DISPLACEMENT; LONGITUDINAL LIGAMENTS; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, ANATOMIC; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; SPONDYLOSIS;

EID: 77955981555     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c55bcd     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Sasso R. Cervical kinematics after Bryan disc arthroplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech 2008;21:19-22.
2. Sasso R. Artificial disc versus fusion. A prospective randomized study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients. Spine 2007;32:2933-2940
3. Mumanenni P. Clinical and radiographic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 2007;6:198-209.
4. Murray D. 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 J 2009;9: 275-286
5. Pimenta L. Superiority of multilevel cervical arthroplasty outcomes versus single-level outcomes: 229 consecutive PCM prostheses. Spine 2007;32: 1337-1344
6. An H. Ideal thickness of a Smith-Robinson graft for anterior cervical fusion: a cadaveric study with computed tomographic correlation. Spine 1993; 18(14 suppl):2043-2047
7. Ghanayem A. Effect of Cervical Disc Prosthetic Height on Intervertebral Motion. San Diego, CA: CSRS; 2006.
8. Goffin J. Bryan Disc Arthroplasty Early Postoperative Clinical Results. Scottsdale, AZ: CSRS; 2005.
9. Crawford N. Construction of a local vertebral coordinate system using a digitizing probe [Technical Note]. Spine 1997;22:559-563
10. Mermelstein L. Reinforcement of thoracolumbar burst fractures with calcium phosphate cement: a biomechanical study. Spine 1998;23:664-670
11. Veldpaus FE, Woltring HJ, Dortmans LJ. A least-squares algorithm for the equiform transformation from spatial marker co-ordinates. J Biomech 1988; 21:45-54.
12. White AA, Johnson RM, Panjabi MM. Biomechanical analysis of clinical stability in the cervical spine. Clin Orthopedic Relat Res 1975;109:85-96.
13. Zdeblick TA, Zou D, Warden K. Cervical stability after foraminotomy: a biomechanical in vitro analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1992;74:22-27
14. Grubb M, Currier B. Biomechanical evaluation of posterior cervical stabilization after a wide laminectomy. Spine 1997;22:1948-1954
15. Peng C. Effect of intervertebral disc height on postoperative motion and clinical outcomes after ProDisc-C cervical disc replacement. Spine J 2009;9: 551-555
16. Reitman CA, Hipp JA, Nguyen L, et al. Intervertebral motion between flexion and extension in asymptomatic individuals. Spine 2004;24:2832-2843
17. Snyder J. Effect of uncovertebral joint excision on the motion response of the cervical spine after total disc replacement. Spine 2007;32:2965-2969
18. McAfee P. Cervical disc replacement-porous coated motion prosthesis: a comparative biomechanical analysis showing the key role of the posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine 2003;28(suppl):S176-85.
19. Sekhon LH, Sears W, Duggal N. Cervical arthroplasty after previous surgery: results of treating 24 discs in 15 patients. J Neurosurg Spine 2005;3:335-341
20. Chen T. Biomechanical effects of progressive anterior cervical decompression. Spine 1988;26:6-13.
21. Crawford N, Safavi-Abbasi S, Baek S, et al. Biomechanics of multilevel cervical arthroplasty and combined arthrodesis and arthroplasty. E-poster presented at the NASS 23rd Annual Meeting, October 14-18, 2008, Toronto, ON, Canada.
22. Anakwenze O, Auerbach J, Milby A, et al. Sagittal cervical alignment after cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy fusion: results of a prospective randomized controlled trial. Spine 2009;34:2001-2007
23. Onan O, Atilla MD, Heggeness M, et al. A motion analysis of the cervical facet joint. Spine 1998;23:430-439
24. Puttlitz C, Rousseau M, Zheng X, et al. Intervertebral disc replacement maintains cervical spine kinetics. Spine 2004;29:2809-2814
25. Subramanian N, Reitman C, Nguyen L, et al. Radiographic assessment and quantitative motion analysis of the cervical spine after serial sectioning of the anterior ligamentous structures. Spine 2007;32:518-526
26. Brown T. Intervertebral motion after incremental damage to the posterior structures of the cervical spine. Spine 2005;30:E503-8.