The fate of facet joint and adjacent level disc degeneration following total lumbar disc replacement: A prospective clinical, X-ray, and magnetic resonance imaging investigation

Spine

Volumn 35, Issue 22, 2010, Pages 1991-2003

  Siepe, Christoph J ^a,b   Zelenkov, Pjotr ^c   Sauri Barraza, Jose Carlos ^d   Szeimies, Ulrike ^e   Grubinger, Thomas ^f   Tepass, Alexander ^b   Stäbler, Axel ^e   Mayer, Michael H ^a,b  

^a Spine Center   (Germany)

^b PARACELSUS MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Austria)

^c INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL CHEMISTRY   (Russian Federation)

^d Centro Medico ABC   (Mexico)

^e Krankenhaus Munich Harlaching   (Germany)

^f INNSBRUCK MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Austria)

Author keywords

adjacent disc degeneration; adjacent level morbidity; clinical results; facet arthrosis; spine arthroplasty; total disc replacement

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; DISEASE COURSE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK DISEASE; JOINT DEGENERATION; LUMBAR DISK; LUMBOSACRAL SPINE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MORBIDITY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANGE OF MOTION; RISK FACTOR; SPINE SURGERY; TOTAL LUMBAR DISC REPLACEMENT; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; X RAY; ZYGAPOPHYSEAL JOINT;

ADULT; AGED; COHORT STUDIES; DISKECTOMY; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK DISPLACEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NERVE DEGENERATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; SPONDYLOSIS; YOUNG ADULT; ZYGAPOPHYSEAL JOINT;

EID: 78149283851     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d6f878     Document Type: Article

References (103)

1. Dagenais S, Caro J, Haldeman S. A systematic review of low back pain cost of illness studies in the United States and internationally. Spine J 2008;8:8-20.
2. Adams MA, Roughley PJ. What is intervertebral disc degeneration, and what causes it? Spine 2006;31:2151-61.
3. Gillet P. The fate of the adjacent motion segments after lumbar fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:338-45.
4. Goulet JA, Senunas LE, DeSilva GL, et al. Autogenous iliac crest bone graft. Complications and functional assessment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997:76-81.
5. Kumar MN, Jacquot F, Hall H. Long-term follow-up of functional outcomes and radiographic changes at adjacent levels following lumbar spine fusion for degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J 2001;10:309-13.
6. Lee CK. Accelerated degeneration of the segment adjacent to a lumbar fusion. Spine 1988;13:375-7.
7. 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.
8. Umehara S, Zindrick MR, Patwardhan AG, et al. The biomechanical effect of postoperative hypolordosis in instrumented lumbar fusion on instrumented and adjacent spinal segments. Spine 2000;25:1617-24.
9. Katz V, Schofferman J, Reynolds J. The sacroiliac joint: a potential cause of pain after lumbar fusion tothe sacrum. J Spinal Disord Tech2003;16:96-9.
10. Maigne JY, Planchon CA. Sacroiliac joint pain after lumbar fusion: a study with anesthetic blocks. Eur Spine J 2005;14:654-8.
11. Ha KY, Lee JS, Kim KW. Degeneration of sacroiliac joint after instrumented lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: a prospective cohort study over five-year follow-up. Spine 2008;33:1192-8.
12. Moshirfar A, Jenis LG, Spector LR, et al. Computed tomography evaluation of superior-segment facet-joint violation after pedicle instrumentation of the lumbar spine with a midline surgical approach. Spine 2006;31: 2624-9.
13. Shah RR, Mohammed S, Saifuddin A, et al. Radiologic evaluation of adjacent superior segment facet joint violation following transpedicular instrumentation of the lumbar spine. Spine 2003;28:272-5.
14. Cardoso MJ, Dmitriev AE, Helgeson M, et al. Does superior-segment facet violation or laminectomy destabilize the adjacent level in lumbar transpe-dicular fixation? An in vitro human cadaveric assessment. Spine 2008;33: 2868-73.
15. 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.
16. Cinotti G, David T, Postacchini F. Results of disc prosthesis after a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. Spine 1996;21:995-1000.
17. 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;32:661-6.
18. 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.
19. Guyer RD, McAfee PC, Banco RJ, et al. Prospective, randomized, multi-center Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: five-year follow-up. Spine J 2009;9:374-86.
20. 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.
21. 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;18:219-23.
22. 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;18:353-9.
23. McAfee PC, CunninghamB, HolsappleG, 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.
24. Sasso RC, Foulk DM, Hahn M. Prospective, randomized trial of metal-on-metal artificial lumbar disc replacement: initial results for treatment of discogenic pain. Spine 2008;33:123-31.
25. Tropiano P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, et al. Lumbar total disc replacement. Seven to 11-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005;87:490-6.
26. 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.
27. Siepe CJ, Mayer HM, Heinz-Leisenheimer M, et al. Total lumbar disc replacement: different results for different levels. Spine 2007;32:782-90.
28. 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.
29. Freeman BJ, Davenport J. Total disc replacement in the lumbar spine: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Spine J 2006. 15. 439-47.
30. van Tulder MW, Koes B, Seitsalo S, et al. Outcome of invasive treatment modalities on back pain and sciatica: an evidence-based review. Eur Spine J 2006;15(suppl 1):S82-92.
31. 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;33:1262-9.
32. Harrop JS, Youssef JA, Maltenfort M, et al. Lumbar adjacent segment degeneration and disease after arthrodesis and total disc arthroplasty. Spine 2008;33:1701-7.
33. 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;29:2538-41.
34. McAfee PC. The indications for lumbar and cervical disc replacement. Spine J 2004;4:177S-81S.
35. 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.
36. Chin KR. Epidemiology of indications and contraindications to total disc replacement in an academic practice. Spine J 2007;7:392-8.
37. 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;32:113-9.
38. Mayer HM, Wiechert K. Microsurgical anterior approaches to the lumbar spine for interbody fusion and total disc replacement. Neurosurgery 2002; 51:S159-65.
39. 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.
40. Bertagnoli R, Marnay T, Mayer HM, eds. The ProDisc Book. Tuttlingen, Germany: Spine Solutions GmbH; 2003.
41. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, et al. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 1980;66:271-3.
42. Harrison DE, Harrison DD, Cailliet R, et al. Radiographic analysis of lumbar lordosis: centroid, Cobb, TRALL, and Harrison posterior tangent methods. Spine 2001;26:E235-42.
43. 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.
44. Lim MR, Girardi FP, Zhang K,et al. Measurementof total disc replacement radiographic range of motion: a comparison of two techniques. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005;18:252-6.
45. Lim MR, Loder RT, Huang RC, et al. Measurement error of lumbar total disc replacement range of motion. Spine 2006;31:E291-7.
46. Pfirrmann CW, Metzdorf A, Zanetti M, et al. Magnetic resonance classification of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration. Spine 2001;26:1873-8.
47. Weishaupt D, Zanetti M, Boos N, et al. MR imaging and CT in osteoar-thritis of the lumbar facet joints. Skeletal Radiol 1999;28:215-9.
48. Kettler A, Wilke HJ. Review of existing grading systems for cervical or lumbar disc and facet joint degeneration. Eur Spine J 2006;15:705-18.
49. Park CK, Ryu KS, Jee WH. Degenerative changes of discs and facet joints in lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc II: minimum two-year follow-up. Spine 2008;33:1755-61.
50. 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.
51. FujiwaraA, Tamai K, Yamato M, et al. The relationship between facet joint osteoarthritis and disc degenerationof the lumbar spine: an MRI study. Eur Spine J 1999;8:396-401.
52. Kalichman L, Li L, Kim DH, et al. Facet joint osteoarthritis and low back pain in the community-based population. Spine 2008;33:2560-5.
53. Carrino JA, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, et al. Lumbar spine: reliability of MR imaging findings. Radiology 2009;250:161-70.
54. Huang RC, Tropiano P, Marnay T, et al. Range of motion and adjacent level degeneration after lumbar total disc replacement. Spine J 2006;6: 242-7.
55. Berlemann U, Gries NC, Moore RJ. The relationship between height, shape and histological changes in early degeneration of the lower lumbar discs. Eur Spine J 1998;7:212-7.
56. Frobin W, Brinckmann P, Kramer M, et al. Height of lumbar discs measured from radiographs compared with degeneration and height classified from MR images. Eur Radiol 2001;11:263-9.
57. Luoma K, Vehmas T, Riihimaki H, et al. Disc height and signal intensity of the nucleus pulposus on magnetic resonance imaging as indicators of lumbar disc degeneration. Spine 2001;26:680-6.
58. Fujiwara A, Lim TH, An HS, et al. The effect of disc degeneration and facet joint osteoarthritis on the segmental flexibility of the lumbar spine. Spine 2000;25:3036-44.
59. Masuda K, Aota Y, Muehleman C, et al. A novel rabbit model of mild, reproducible disc degeneration by an anulus needle puncture: correlation between the degree of disc injury and radiological and histological appearances of disc degeneration. Spine 2005;30:5-14.
60. Elfering A, Semmer N, Birkhofer D, et al. Risk factors for lumbar disc degeneration: a 5-year prospective MRI study in asymptomatic individuals. Spine 2002;27:125-34.
61. Videman T, Battie MC, Ripatti S, et al. Determinants of the progression in lumbar degeneration: a 5-year follow-up study of adult male monozygotic twins. Spine 2006;31:671-8.
62. Auerbach JD, Wills BP, McIntosh TC, et al. Evaluationof spinal kinematics following lumbar total disc replacement and circumferential fusion using in vivo fluoroscopy. Spine 2007;32:527-36.
63. Chen SH, Zhong ZC, Chen CS, et al. Biomechanical comparison between lumbar disc arthroplasty and fusion. Med Eng Phys 2009;31:244-53.
64. Dmitriev AE, Gill NW, Kuklo TR, et al. The effect of multilevel lumbar disc arthroplasty on the operative-and adjacent-level kinematics and intradiscal pressures: an in vitro human cadaveric assessment. Spine J 2008;8:918-25.
65. Panjabi M, Malcolmson G, Teng E, et al. Hybrid testing of lumbar CHARITE discs versus fusions. Spine 2007;32:959-66; discussion 67.
66. Huang RC, Girardi FP, Cammisa Jr FP, et al. Long-term flexion-extension range of motion of the prodisc total disc replacement. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:435-40.
67. Nunley PD, Jawahar A, Mukherjee DP, et al. Comparison of pressure effects on adjacent disk levels after 2-level lumbar constructs: fusion, hybrid, and total disk replacement. Surg Neurol 2008;70:247-51; discussion 51.
68. Akamaru T, Kawahara N, Tim Yoon S, et al. Adjacent segment motion after a simulated lumbar fusion in different sagittal alignments: a biome-chanical analysis. Spine 2003;28:1560-6.
69. Lazennec JY, Ramare S, Arafati N, et al. Sagittal alignment in lumbosacral fusion: relations between radiological parameters and pain. Eur Spine J 2000;9:47-55.
70. 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;20:357-64.
71. Chung SS, Lee CS, Kang CS, et al. The effect of lumbar total disc replacement on the spinopelvic alignment and range of motion ofthe lumbar spine. J Spinal Disord Tech 2006;19:307-11.
72. Le Huec J, Basso Y, Mathews H, et al. The effect of single-level, total disc arthroplasty on sagittal balance parameters: a prospective study. Eur Spine J 2005;14:480-6.
73. Tournier C, Aunoble S, Le Huec JC, et al. Total disc arthroplasty: consequences for sagittal balance and lumbar spine movement. Eur Spine J 2007; 16:411-21.
74. Trouillier H, Kern P, Refior HJ, et al. A prospective morphological study of facet joint integrity following intervertebral disc replacement with the CHARITE Artificial Disc. Eur Spine J 2006;15:174-82.
75. Cunningham BW. Basic scientific considerations in total disc arthroplasty. Spine J 2004;4:219S-30S.
76. 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.
77. Denoziere G, Ku DN. Biomechanical comparison between fusion of two vertebrae and implantation of an artificial intervertebral disc. J Biomech 2006;39:766-75.
78. 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.
79. Lemaire JP, Skalli W, Lavaste F, et al. Intervertebral disc prosthesis: results and prospects for the year 2000. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997:64-76.
80. 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.
81. O'Leary P, Nicolakis M, Lorenz MA, et al. Response of Charite total disc replacement under physiologic loads: prosthesis component motion patterns. Spine J 2005;5:590-9.
82. Rousseau MA, Bradford DS, Bertagnoli R, et al. Disc arthroplasty design influences intervertebral kinematics and facet forces. Spine J 2006;6: 258-66.
83. Rohlmann A, Mann A, Zander T, et al. Effect of an artificial disc on lumbar spine biomechanics: a probabilistic finite element study. Eur Spine J 2009; 18:89-97.
84. Rundell SA, Auerbach JD, Balderston RA, et al. Total disc replacement positioning affects facet contact forces and vertebral body strains. Spine 2008;33:2510-7.
85. Chung SK, Kim YE, Wang KC. Biomechanical effectof constraint in lumbar total disc replacement: a study with finite element analysis. Spine 2009;34: 1281-6.
86. 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.
87. Rohlmann A, Zander T, Bergmann G. Effect of total disc replacement with ProDisc on intersegmental rotation of the lumbar spine. Spine 2005;30: 738-43.
88. Kafer W, Clessienne CB, Daxle M, et al. Posterior component impingement after lumbar total disc replacement: a radiographic analysis of 66 ProDisc-L prostheses in 56 patients. Spine 2008;33:2444-9.
89. Siepe CJ, Hitzl W, Meschede P, et al. Interdependence between disc space height, range of motion and clinical outcome in total lumbar disc replacement. Spine 2009;34:904-16.
90. Sariali el-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;15:1501-10.
91. Leivseth G, Braaten S, Frobin W, et al. Mobility of lumbar segments instrumented with a ProDisc II prosthesis: a two-year follow-up study. Spine 2006;31:1726-33.
92. Rousseau MA, Bradford DS, Hadi TM, et al. The instant axis of rotation influences facet forces at L5/S1 during flexion/extension and lateral bending. Eur Spine J 2006;15:299-307.
93. 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.
94. Colloca CJ, Keller TS, Moore RJ, et al. Intervertebral disc degeneration reduces vertebral motion responses. Spine 2007;32:E544-50.
95. Kirkaldy-Willis WH, Farfan HF. Instability of the lumbar spine. Clin Or-thop Relat Res 1982:110-23.
96. Rohlmann A, Zander T, Schmidt H, et al. Analysis of the influence of disc degeneration on the mechanical behaviour of a lumbar motion segment using the finite element method. J Biomech 2006;39:2484-90.
97. Korecki CL, Costi JJ, Iatridis JC. Needle puncture injury affects interverte-bral disc mechanics and biology in an organ culture model. Spine 2008;33: 235-41.
98. Nassr A, Lee JY, Bashir RS, et al. Does incorrect level needle localization during anterior cervical discectomy and fusion lead to accelerated disc degeneration? Spine 2009;34:189-92.
99. Hsieh AH, Hwang D, Ryan DA, et al. Degenerative anular changes induced by puncture are associated with insufficiency of disc biomechanical function. Spine 2009;34:998-1005.
100. Moore RJ, Crotti TN, Osti OL, et al. Osteoarthrosis of the facet joints resulting from anular rim lesions in sheep lumbar discs. Spine 1999;24:519-25.
101. Carragee EJ, Don AS, Hurwitz EL, et al. 2009 ISSLS Prize Winner: does discography cause accelerated progression of degeneration changes in the lumbar disc: a 10-year matched cohort study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34:2338-45.
102. Eubanks JD, Lee MJ, Cassinelli E, et al. Prevalence of lumbar facet arthrosis and its relationship to age, sex, and race: an anatomic study of cadaveric specimens. Spine 2007;32:2058-62.
103. Grogan J, Nowicki BH, Schmidt TA, et al. Lumbar facet joint tropism does not accelerate degeneration of the facet joints. Am J Neuroradiol 1997;18: 1325-9.