Does heterotopic ossification affect the outcomes of cervical total disc replacement? A meta-analysis

Spine

Volumn 40, Issue 6, 2015, Pages E332-E340

  Zhou, Hao Han ^a   Qu, Yang ^a   Dong, Rong Peng ^a   Kang, Ming Yang ^a   Zhao, Jian Wu ^a  

^a JILIN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

cervical total disc replacement; classification; heterotopic ossification; high grade HO; low grade HO; meta analysis; Neck Disability Index (NDI); range of motion (ROM); ROM affecting HO; ROM preserving HO; visual analogue scale (VAS)

Indexed keywords

ARM PAIN; ARTICLE; CERVICAL TOTAL DISC REPLACEMENT; HETEROTOPIC OSSIFICATION; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; NECK DISABILITY INDEX; NECK PAIN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANGE OF MOTION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TOTAL DISC REPLACEMENT; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ADVERSE EFFECTS; AGED; CERVICAL SPINE; FEMALE; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; SURGERY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VERY ELDERLY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NECK PAIN; OSSIFICATION, HETEROTOPIC; TOTAL DISC REPLACEMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84952943036     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000776     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Smith GW, Robinson RA,. The treatment of certain cervical-spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1958; 40-A: 607-24.
2. Hilibrand AS, Robbins M,. Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion? Spine J 2004; 4: 190s-4s.
3. Vital JM, Boissiere L,. Total disc replacement. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2014; 100: S1-14.
4. Cao JM, Zhang YZ, Shen Y, Complications of Bryan cervical disc replacement. Orthop Surg 2010; 2: 86-93.
5. Pimenta L, Oliveira L, Coutinho E, Bone formation in cervical total disk replacement (CTDR) up to the 6-year follow-up: Experience from 272 levels. Neurosurg Q 2013; 23: 1-6.
6. Jin YJ, Park SB, Kim MJ, An analysis of heterotopic ossification in cervical disc arthroplasty: a novel morphologic classification of an ossified mass. Spine J 2013; 13: 408-20.
7. Wright JG, Swiontkowski MF, Heckman JD,. Introducing levels of evidence to the journal. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A: 1-3.
8. Kim HJ, Kelly MP, Ely CG, The risk of adjacent-level ossification development after surgery in the cervical spine: are there factors that affect the risk? A systematic review. Spine 2012; 37: S65-74.
9. McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Devine J, Classification of heterotopic ossification (HO) in artificial disk replacement. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003; 16: 384-9.
10. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Measuring inconsistency in meta-Analyses. BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 2003; 327: 557-60.
11. Sutton AJ, Methods for meta-Analysis in medical research. Statistics in Medicine 2003; 22: 3112-4.
12. Tu TH, Wu JC, Huang WC, The effects of carpentry on heterotopic ossification and mobility in cervical arthroplasty: determination by computed tomography with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2012; 16: 601-9.
13. Quan GM, Vital JM, Hansen S, Eight-year clinical and radiological follow-up of the Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty. Spine 2011; 36: 639-46.
14. Wu JC, Huang WC, Tsai HW, Differences between 1- and 2-level cervical arthroplasty: more heterotopic ossification in 2-level disc replacement: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2012; 16: 594-600.
15. Suchomel P, Jurak L, Benes V III, Clinical results and development of heterotopic ossification in total cervical disc replacement during a 4-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 2010; 19: 307-15.
16. Barbagallo GM, Corbino LA, Olindo G, Heterotopic ossification in cervical disc arthroplasty: is it clinically relevant? Evid Based Spine Care J 2010; 1: 15-20.
17. Wu JC, Huang WC, Tu TH, Differences between soft-disc herniation and spondylosis in cervical arthroplasty: CT-documented heterotopic ossification with minimum 2 years of follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 2012; 16: 163-71.
18. Tian W, Han X, Liu B, Generation and development of paravertebral ossification in cervical artificial disc replacement: a detailed analytic report using coronal reconstruction CT [published online ahead of print October 30, 2013]. J Spinal Disord Tech.
19. Huppert J, Beaurain J, Steib JP, Comparison between single- and multi-level patients: clinical and radiological outcomes 2 years after cervical disc replacement. Eur Spine J 2011; 20: 1417-26.
20. Mehren C, Suchomel P, Grochulla F, Heterotopic ossification in total cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine 2006; 31: 2802-6.
21. Harrod CC, Hilibrand AS, Fischer DJ, Adjacent segment pathology following cervical motion-sparing procedures or devices compared with fusion surgery: a systematic review. Spine 2012; 37: S96-112.
22. Cheng L, Nie L, Li M, Superiority of the Bryan((R)) disc prosthesis for cervical myelopathy: a randomized study with 3-year followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469: 3408-14.
23. Chen J, Wang X, Bai W, Prevalence of heterotopic ossification after cervical total disc arthroplasty: a meta-Analysis. Eur Spine J 2012; 21: 674-80.
24. Yi S, Kim KN, Yang MS, Difference in occurrence of heterotopic ossification according to prosthesis type in the cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine 2010; 35: 1556-61.
25. Pettine K,. Metanalysis of heterotopic ossification (HO) following cervical artificial disc replacement (CADR). Spine J 2012; 12: 51S.
26. Steilen D, Hauser R, Woldin B, Chronic neck pain: making the connection between capsular ligament laxity and cervical instability. Open Orthop J 2014; 8: 326-45.
27. McAfee PC, Cunningham B, Dmitriev A, Cervical disc replacement-porous coated motion prosthesis: a comparative biomechanical analysis showing the key role of the posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine 2003; 28: S176-85.
28. McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Hayes V, Biomechanical analysis of rotational motions after disc arthroplasty: implications for patients with adult deformities. Spine 2006; 31: S152-60.
29. Su Kim K, Hwa Heo D,. Do postoperative biomechanical changes induce heterotopic ossification after cervical arthroplasty? A 5-year follow-up study [published online ahead of print November 21, 2013]. J Spinal Disord Tech.
30. Chung SB, Muradov JM, Lee SH, Uncovertebral hypertrophy is a significant risk factor for the occurrence of heterotopic ossification after cervical disc replacement: survivorship analysis of Bryan disc for single-level cervical arthroplasty. Acta Neurochir 2012; 154: 1017-22.
31. Siepe CJ, Mayer HM, Wiechert K, Clinical results of total lumbar disc replacement with ProDisc II: three-year results for different indications. Spine 2006; 31: 1923-32.
32. Tortolani PJ, Cunningham BW, Eng M, Prevalence of heterotopic ossification following total disc replacement. A prospective, randomized study of two hundred and seventy-six patients. J Bone Joint Surgery Am 2007; 89: 82-8.
33. Lee SE, Chung CK, Jahng TA,. Early development and progression of heterotopic ossification in cervical total disc replacement. J Neurosurg Spine 2012; 16: 31-6.
34. Rousseau MA, Cottin P, Levante S, In vivo kinematics of two types of ball-And-socket cervical disc replacements in the sagittal plane: cranial versus caudal geometric center. Spine 2008; 33: E6-9.
35. Choi WJ, Lee JW,. Heterotopic ossification after total ankle arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93: 1508-12.