Unintended fusion in cervical artificial disk replacement: a prospective study on heterotopic ossification, progression, and clinical outcome, with 5-year follow-up

Heterotopic ossification, osteolysis and implant failure following cervical total disc replacement with the M6-C™ artificial disc

INTRODUCTION

A recent study reported a 34% mid-term revision rate after M6-C™ cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) for wear-related osteolysis. Here, we aim to investigate the prevalence, risk factors, and radiographic characteristics of periprosthetic bony changes and implant failure of the M6-C™ artificial disc.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed radiographic (conventional X-ray, CT scan) and clinical outcomes (EQ-5D-5L, Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for neck and arm pain) data collected during routine follow-up of patients who underwent CTDR with the M6-C™ between 2011 and 2015.

RESULTS

In total, 85 patients underwent CTDR with the M6-C™. Follow-up data were available for 43 patients (54% female, mean age 44 years) with 50 implants and a mean follow-up of 8.1 years (6.5-11 years). Implant failure with the presence of severe osteolysis was identified in 5 (12%) patients who were all male (p = 0.016) and implanted at the C5/6 level (p = 0.11). All failed implants required revision surgery. The overall prevalence of osteolysis was 44% (22/50 implants) and 34% (17/50 implants) for significant heterotopic ossification. Patients with high-grade osteolysis showed higher VAS arm pain (p = 0.05) and lower EQ-5D-VAS health VAS (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

We report a lower reoperation rate for failed M6-C™ implants than previously published, but confirmed that osteolysis and heterotopic ossification are common following CTDR with the M6-C™ and may be asymptomatic. Therefore, we strongly recommend ongoing clinical and radiographic monitoring after CTDR with the M6-C™, particularly for male patients implanted at the C5/6 level.

Incidence of Heterotopic Ossification at 10 years After Cervical Disk Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the incidence of heterotopic ossification (HO) 10 years after cervical disk replacement (CDR).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

HO is a common complication after CDR and may limit the range of motion of the artificial disk. As HO usually progresses slowly, a long-term follow-up is required to better understand its incidence. In recent years, the increasing number of original articles reporting 10-year outcomes gives us the opportunity to better understand the long-term incidence of HO.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify eligible studies. The incidence of HO was pooled, and subgroup analysis was performed. Meta-regression analyses were conducted to identify factors contributing to heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Eleven studies with at least 10 years of follow-up comprising 1140 patients who underwent CDR were included. The pooled incidence of overall HO was 70% (95% CI, 60%-81%) at 10 years postoperatively, 60% (95% CI, 44%-75%) at five or six years postoperatively, and 50% (95% CI, 27%-72%) at one or two years postoperatively. The pooled incidence of severe HO (grade 3 or 4) was 37% (95% CI, 29%-45%), and mild HO (grade 1 to 2) was 30% (95% CI, 17%-44%) at 10 years of follow-up. Pooled range of motion decreased from 8.59° before surgery to 7.40° 10 years after surgery. Subgroup analysis showed that HO incidence differed according to the prosthesis type. The earlier publication was associated with a higher pooled incidence of severe HO in the meta-regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first meta-analysis providing detailed information on the pooled 10-year incidence of HO after CDR. The incidence of HO seems to increase with the length of follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

A new prognostic nomogram for heterotopic ossification formation after elbow trauma : the Shanghai post-Traumatic Elbow Heterotopic Ossification Prediction (STEHOP) model

AIMS

Heterotopic ossification (HO) is a common complication after elbow trauma and can cause severe upper limb disability. Although multiple prognostic factors have been reported to be associated with the development of post-traumatic HO, no model has yet been able to combine these predictors more succinctly to convey prognostic information and medical measures to patients. Therefore, this study aimed to identify prognostic factors leading to the formation of HO after surgery for elbow trauma, and to establish and validate a nomogram to predict the probability of HO formation in such particular injuries.

METHODS

This multicentre case-control study comprised 200 patients with post-traumatic elbow HO and 229 patients who had elbow trauma but without HO formation between July 2019 and December 2020. Features possibly associated with HO formation were obtained. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression model was used to optimize feature selection. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to build the new nomogram: the Shanghai post-Traumatic Elbow Heterotopic Ossification Prediction model (STEHOP). STEHOP was validated by concordance index (C-index) and calibration plot. Internal validation was conducted using bootstrapping validation.

RESULTS

Male sex, obesity, open wound, dislocations, late definitive surgical treatment, and lack of use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were identified as adverse predictors and incorporated to construct the STEHOP model. It displayed good discrimination with a C-index of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.75 to 0.84). A high C-index value of 0.77 could still be reached in the internal validation. The calibration plot showed good agreement between nomogram prediction and observed outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The newly developed STEHOP model is a valid and convenient instrument to predict HO formation after surgery for elbow trauma. It could assist clinicians in counselling patients regarding treatment expectations and therapeutic choices. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):963-971.

Artificial disc replacement and adjacent-segment pathology: 10-year outcomes of a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

Artificial disc replacement (ADR) is designed to preserve motion and thus protect against adjacent-segment pathology (ASP) and act as an alternative treatment to fusion surgery. The question remains, how well do ADR devices perform after 10 years of follow-up compared with fusion surgery in terms of patient satisfaction, sustainability, and protection against ASP?

METHODS

This was the 10-year follow-up study of 153 participants who underwent ADR or fusion surgery after anterior decompression due to cervical degenerative radiculopathy (ISRCTN registration no. 44347115). Scores on the Neck Disability Index (NDI), EQ-5D, and visual analog scale for neck and arm pain were obtained from the Swedish Spine Registry and analyzed using ANCOVA. Information about secondary surgical procedures was collected from medical records and presented as Kaplan-Meier curves. MRI and flexion-extension radiography were performed, and ASP was graded according to the Miyazaki classification system.

RESULTS

Ten participants were lost to follow-up, which left 143 participants (80 underwent ADR and 65 underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion). There were no differences between groups in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (10-year difference in NDI scores 1.7 points, 95% CI -5.1 to 8.5, p = 0.61). Nineteen (24%) participants in the ADR group compared with 9 (14%) in the fusion group underwent secondary surgical procedures. The higher reoperation rate of the ADR group was mainly due to 11 female participants with device loosening. The rates of reoperation due to ASP were similar between groups, which was confirmed with MRI assessment of ASP that also showed no differences between the groups (p = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

This was the first 10-year follow-up study to compare ADR with fusion surgery and to provide MRI information for the assessment of ASP. The authors found no benefit of ADR over fusion surgery after anterior decompression for cervical degenerative radiculopathy.