Cervical total disc replacement using a novel compressible prosthesis: Results from a prospective Food and Drug Administration-regulated feasibility study with 24-month follow-up

Restoration of Range of Motion in the Cervical Spine through Single-Segment Artificial Disc Replacement Using the Baguera®C Prosthesis

Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a standard procedure for degenerative diseases of the cervical spine, providing nerve decompression and spinal stabilization. However, it limits cervical spine motility, restricts fused segment activity, and may lead to adjacent degeneration. Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is an accepted alternative that preserves the structure and flexibility of the cervical spine. This study aimed to explore the dynamic changes in the range of motion (ROM) of the cervical spine after CDA using a viscoelastic artificial disc, as well as the factors affecting mobility restoration. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 132 patients who underwent single-level anterior cervical discectomy and CDA from January 2015 to June 2022. Result: Analysis of data from 132 patients revealed a significant improvement in clinical outcomes. The mean ROM of C2-C7 and functional spinal unit (FSU) segments significantly increased from 2 to 36 months post-operatively. Cervical spine flexibility was preserved and enhanced after prosthesis implantation. However, it took six months for the cervical spine motility to stabilize. In addition, sex and age were found to impact motility restoration, with female and younger patients exhibiting larger ROMs post-surgery. Additionally, CDA at the C5-C6 level resulted in the greatest increase in ROM, potentially improving overall kinematic ability. Conclusions: Single-segment artificial disc arthroplasty effectively restores the ROM in degenerative cervical spine conditions.

Prospective, multicenter clinical trial comparing the M6-C compressible cervical disc with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of single-level degenerative cervical radiculopathy: 5-year results of an FDA investigational device exemption study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Various total disc replacement (TDR) designs have been compared to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with favorable short and long-term outcomes in FDA-approved investigational device exemption (IDE) trials. The unique design of M6-C, with a compressible viscoelastic nuclear core and an annular structure, has previously demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes through 24 months.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of the M6-C compressible artificial cervical disc and compare to ACDF at 5 years.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, multicenter, concurrently and historically controlled, FDA-approved IDE clinical trial.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Subjects with one-level symptomatic degenerative cervical radiculopathy were enrolled and received M6-C (n=160) or ACDF (n=189) treatment as part of the IDE study. Safety outcomes were evaluated at 5 years for all subjects. The primary effectiveness endpoint was available at 5 years for 113 M6-C subjects and 106 ACDF controls.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary endpoint of this analysis was composite clinical success (CCS) at 60 months. Secondary endpoints were function and pain (neck disability index, VAS), physical quality of life (SF-36, SF-12), safety, neurologic, and radiographic assessments.

METHODS

Propensity score subclassification was used to control for selection bias and match baseline covariates of the control group to the M6-C subjects. Sixty-month CCS rates were estimated for each treatment group using a generalized linear model controlling for propensity score.

RESULTS

At 5 years postoperatively, the M6-C treatment resulted in 82.3% CCS while the ACDF group showed 67.0% CCS (superiority p=.013). Secondary endpoints indicated that significantly more M6-C subjects achieved VAS neck and arm pain improvements and showed maintained or improved physical functioning on quality-of-life measures compared to baseline assessments. The M6-C group-maintained flexion-extension motion, with significantly greater increases from baseline disc height and disc angle than observed in the control group. The rates of M6-C subsequent surgical interventions (SSI; 3.1%) and definitely device- or procedure-related serious adverse events (SAE failure; 3.1%) were similar to ACDF rates (SSI=5.3%, SAE failure=4.8%; p>.05 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

Subjects treated with the M6-C artificial disc demonstrated superior 5-year achievement of clinical success when compared to ACDF controls. In addition, significantly more subjects in the M6-C group showed improved pain and physical functioning scores than observed in ACDF subjects, with no difference in reoperation rates or safety outcomes.

Prospective, multicenter study of 2-level cervical arthroplasty with a PEEK-on-ceramic artificial disc

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a PEEK-on-ceramic cervical total disc replacement (cTDR) device for the treatment of 2-level cervical disc disease with radiculopathy and/or myelopathy.

METHODS

The study was a prospective, nonrandomized, historically controlled FDA investigational device exemption trial evaluating the Simplify Cervical Artificial Disc for use at 2 levels. The anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) control group was derived from a propensity score-matched (using subclassification) cohort of patients who participated in an earlier prospective trial in which similar indications were used. The follow-up duration was 24 months. The primary outcome was a 4-point composite success classification. Other validated clinical and radiographic assessments were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The investigational group (n = 182) was compared with patients who underwent ACDF (n = 170) in a historical control group using propensity score analysis. The overall composite success rate was statistically significantly greater in the cTDR group compared with the ACDF group (86.7% vs 77.1%; p < 0.05). The mean Neck Disability Index scores improved significantly in both groups, with cTDR significantly lower at some follow-up points. At the 24-month follow-up, a minimum 15-point improvement in Neck Disability Index scores was achieved in 92.9% of the cTDR group and 83.5% of the ACDF group (p > 0.05). In both groups, neck and arm pain scores improved significantly (p < 0.05) by 6 weeks and improvement was maintained throughout follow-up. Segmental range of motion was maintained at both treated segments in the cTDR group. MRI performed in the cTDR group at 24 months postoperatively found minimal changes in facet joint degeneration. The rate of subsequent surgical intervention was 2.2% in the cTDR group and 8.8% in the ACDF group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study adds to the growing body of literature supporting cTDR for 2-level cervical disc disease with radiculopathy or myelopathy. cTDR showed a superior overall success rate compared to ACDF, while maintaining motion. These results support that the Simplify disc is a viable alternative to ACDF in appropriately selected patients with 2-level cervical spondylosis.

Catastrophic delayed cervical arthroplasty failure: illustrative case

BACKGROUND

Cervical disc replacement (CDR) is an increasingly used alternative to fusion for symptomatic cervical disc disease. While more studies have suggested favorability of CDR over fusion procedures, limited data exist regarding implant fatigability. Here, the authors present a unique and previously unreported failure of the M6-C prosthesis causing spinal cord injury.

OBSERVATIONS

A 49-year-old female with history of cervical degenerative disease and prior C4–7 M6-C arthroplasty presented 9 years later after a minor fall from standing. She endorsed bilateral hand numbness ascending to forearms and shoulders, with dysesthesias and weakness. Imaging showed fractured arthroplasty penetrating the spinal cord. Revision surgery found a ruptured arthroplasty annulus with metal piece piercing the spinal cord. Partial C4 and C5 corpectomy was performed to remove the integrated fins of the arthroplasty and inspect the cord and dura. This was reconstructed with a corpectomy cage and plate. The patient made an excellent recovery, with improvement in her weakness and resolution of her sensory symptoms.

LESSONS

Possibility of fatigue-related failures presenting years after implantation have only been infrequently reported but can be catastrophic for patients. The authors encourage further discussions in this area, increased counseling with patients, and recommend a patient registry to better document adverse events.

Comparison of in vivo kinematic and radiological parameters of three cervical disc prostheses

Introduction:

Cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) is an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for select patients that may preserve range of motion and reduce adjacent segment disease. Various CTDR prostheses are available; however, comparative data are limited. This study aimed to compare the short-term kinematic and radiological parameters of the M6-C, Mobi-C, and the CP-ESP prostheses.

Methods:

This retrospective cohort study included patients treated with CTDR between March 2005 and October 2020 at a single institution. Patients were included if their follow-up assessment included lateral erect and flexion/extension radiographs. The primary outcome assessed at 3-months postoperatively was range of motion, measured by the difference in functional spinal unit angle between flexion and extension.

Results:

A total of 131 CTDR levels (120 patients, 46.2 ± 10.1 years, 57% male) were included. Prostheses implanted included the M6-C (n = 52), Mobi-C (n = 54), and CP-ESP (n = 25). Range of motion varied significantly (8.2° ± 4.4° vs. 10.9° ± 4.7° vs. 6.1° ± 2.7°, P < 0.001). On post hoc analysis, the Mobi-C prosthesis demonstrated a significantly greater range of motion than either the M6-C prosthesis (P = 0.003) or CP-ESP (P < 0.001).

Conclusion:

Although the optimal range of motion for CTDR has not been established, short-term differences in the range of motion may guide the selection of CTDR prosthesis. Further studies with longer follow-up and consideration of clinical outcome measures are necessary.

Biomechanics of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Devices

Prosthesis design has an influence on the quantity and quality of postoperative motion after cervical disc arthroplasty. Prostheses with built-in resistance to angular and translational motion may have an advantage in restoring physiologic motion. The ability of a prosthesis to work with remaining bony and soft tissues to restore motion and load-sharing is a function of the kinematic degrees of freedom DOF, axis of rotation for a given motion, and device stiffness. How these characteristics allow the prosthesis to work with the patient's anatomy will determine whether the prosthesis is successful at restoring motion and mitigating adjacent-level stresses.

Cervical Total Disc Replacement: Novel Devices

This article reviews the available literature for novel cervical total disc replacement devices, including ones which are available inside and outside of the United States. It includes biomechanical consideration as well as design characteristics and clinical data when available.

Prospective, multicenter clinical trial comparing M6-C compressible six degrees of freedom cervical disc with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of single-level degenerative cervical radiculopathy: 2-year results of an FDA investigational device exemption study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Various designs of total disc replacement (TDR) devices have been compared to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with favorable outcomes in FDA-approved investigational device exemption trials. The design of M6-C with a compressible viscoelastic nuclear core and an annular structure is substantially different than prior designs and has previously demonstrated favorable kinematics and clinical outcomes in small case series.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the novel M6-C compressible artificial cervical disc compared with ACDF for subjects with single-level degenerative cervical radiculopathy.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Prospective, multicenter, concurrently and historically controlled, FDA-approved investigational device exemption clinical trial.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Subjects with one-level symptomatic degenerative cervical radiculopathy were enrolled and assigned to receive M6-C or ACDF.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain and function (Neck Disability Index, VAS), quality of life (SF-36), safety, neurologic, and radiographic assessments of motion (both flexion extension and lateral bending) were performed. The primary clinical endpoint was composite clinical success (CCS) at 24 months.

METHODS

Using propensity score subclassification to control for selection bias, 160 M6-C subjects were compared to a matched subset of 189 ACDF controls (46 concurrent and 143 historical controls).

RESULTS

Both ACDF and M6-C subjects reported significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes at all time points over baseline. Overall SF-36 Physical Component Score and neck and arm pain scores were significantly improved for M6-C as compared to ACDF treatment. CCS and mean Neck Disability Index improvements were similar between M6-C and ACDF. Correspondingly, there were significantly fewer subjects that utilized pain medication or opioids following M6-C treatment at 24 months relative to baseline. Range of motion was maintained in subjects treated with M6-C. Subsequent surgical interventions, dysphagia rates, and serious adverse events were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

M6-C treatment demonstrated both safety and effectiveness for the treatment of degenerative cervical radiculopathy. Treatment with M6-C demonstrated noninferiority for the primary endpoint, indicating a similar ability to achieve CCS at 24 months. However, for the secondary endpoints, M6-C subjects demonstrated significantly improved pain and function compared to ACDF subjects, while maintaining range of motion, improving quality of life, and decreasing analgesic and opioid usage at 2 years postoperatively relative to baseline.

A cross-sectional analysis of 1347 complications for cervical disc replacements from medical device reports maintained by the United States Food and Drug Administration

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Cervical disc replacement (CDR) has increased in popularity over the past decade based on published outcomes from FDA IDE studies with narrowly defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A low rate of complications was noted in these studies. The broader complication profile for CDR in widespread clinical practice has yet to be described.

PURPOSE

To outline the complications reported to the FDA regarding commonly used CDR products STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective database review PATIENT SAMPLE: Nationwide database of reported complications related to CDR products from patients across the country OUTCOME MEASURES: Complications related to CDR METHODS: We queried the MAUDE database and Alternative Summary Reporting (ASR) data files submitted between January 2005 to March 2020. The complications listed for seven FDA-approved CDR implants were analyzed. The entries in the databases were cataloged for complication type, date of entry, source of report, and whether the investigation was "complete". Reports that had too little information to extract relevant data were excluded.

RESULTS

There were 1,517 entries identified in the MAUDE database. After removal of duplicate entries and entries without sufficient information, there were 1,347 entries analyzed. The top five complications were (1) migration of implant (338 entries, 25.2%) (2) insertion problem/failure (312 entries, 23.3%) (3) neck pain (203 entries, 15.2%) (4) heterotopic ossification (108 entries, 8.1%) and (5) radiculopathy (90 entries, 8.1%). The number of analyzed implant-related MAUDE entries and most common implant-related complication for each implant was 209 entries for insertion problem/failure for Mobi-C; 158 entries for migration of implant for ProDisc-C; 154 entries for insertion problem/failure for Bryan cervical disc; 130 entries for migration of implant for Prestige cervical disc; 49 entries for migration of implant for PCM cervical disc; 12 entries for migration of implant for M6 and 10 entries for migration of implant for Secure-C. Only 263 entries (19.5%) were deemed "complete". Most entries were from the manufacturer/company representative/distributor (923 entries, 70%). There were no entries related to cervical disc replacement devices within the ASR data.

CONCLUSIONS

The MAUDE database highlights complications related to CDR implants that may not be emphasized in currently published studies. It is important to understand this broad complication profile for CDR to ensure safe utilization of this new technology.

Late Implant Failure in Cervical Disc Arthroplasty (M6-C, Spinal Kinetics) Causing Radiculopathy and Myelopathy

Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is an approved surgical treatment option in selected patients with cervical spinal disc degeneration. Even though CDA is a standard procedure since 20 years, there is a lack of information about long term performance. The published reoperation rates after CDA are low and comparable to anterior cervical fusion. The authors describe a severe failure and dysfunction with a partial core dislocation of a cervical prosthesis into the spinal canal (M6-C, Spinal Kinetics, Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Six years after implantation of a cTDR (cervical Total Disk Replacement) of the M6 type at C4/5 level, a 52 year-old women presented herself with new clinical signs of cervical myelopathy and radicular pain. Complete posterior dislocation of the central core of the implant into the spinal canal was identified as a cause. The failed device was removed completely and an ACCF (anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion) was performed. Intraoperatively, rupture of the posterior portion of the mesh tissue with posterior dislocation of the whole prosthesis core was detected. This is the second described case of a severe implant failure with core dislocation in this type of cTDR device. Even though there are thousands of successful implantations and middle term outcomes, it seems to be necessary to continue with long term radiological follow up to exclude similar failure in this type of prosthesis.

Viscoelastic cervical total disc replacement devices: Design concepts

Cervical disc replacement (CDR) is a motion-preserving surgical procedure for treating patients with degenerative disorders. Numerous reports of first generation CDR "ball-and-socket" articulating devices have shown satisfactory clinical results. As a result, CDR devices have been safely implemented in the surgeon's armamentarium on a global scale. However, only minor design improvements have been made over the last few years, as first generation CDRs devices were based on traditional synovial joint arthroplasty designs. As a consequence, these articulating designs have limited resemblance to the complex kinematic behavior of a natural disc. This has driven the development of deformable viscoelastic CDR devices to better mimic the biomechanical behavior of a natural disc. As a result, several viscoelastic CDR devices have been developed in recent years that vary in terms of materials, design and clinical outcomes. Since these viscoelastic CDR devices are fairly new, their weaknesses and strengths, which are related to their design characteristics, have not been well described. Therefore, this literature review discusses design related advantages and disadvantages of deformable viscoelastic CDR devices. As such, this paper can provide insight for surgeons and engineers on specific design characteristics of several viscoelastic devices and could potentially help to develop and design future implants. Eleven viscoelastic CDR devices were identified. An extensive database search on the devices' tradenames in Medline and PubMed was performed next. The devices were categorized based on common design characteristics to give an overview of both category and device specific complications and advantages. Overall, literature shows that most of these viscoelastic CDR devices can provide motion in all six degrees-of-freedom and have a variable center of rotation. Nevertheless, the viscoelastic materials used do not have an extensive history in orthopedics, so the long-term material behavior in vivo is still unknown. Although the viscoelastic devices have common benefits and risks, each specific design and category also has its own design related advantages and drawbacks that are described in this review. Altogether, viscoelastic total disc replacements seem to be a promising option for the future of cervical arthroplasty, but long-term clinical outcome is needed to confirm the advantages of mimicking the viscoelasticity of a natural disc.

The MOVE-C Cervical Artificial Disc - Design, Materials, Mechanical Safety

Purpose

There are various cervical disc prostheses on the market today. They can be subdivided into implants with a ball-and-socket design and implants with a flexible core, which is captured between the implant endplates and sealed using various sheaths. Implants with an articulating surface are mostly metal-on-metal or metal-on-UHMWPE designs and, thus, do not allow for axial damping. The aim of this study is to provide mechanical safety and performance data of the MOVE-C cervical disc prosthesis which combines both an articulating surface and a flexible core.

Materials and Methods

MOVE-C consists of a cranial and caudal metal plate made of TiAl6V4. The cranial plate is TiNbN coated on its articulating surface. The caudal plate has a fixed polycarbonate-urethane (PCU) core. The TiNbN coating is meant to optimize the wear behavior of the titanium endplate, whereas the PCU core is meant to allow for a reversible axial deformation, a pre-defined neutral zone and a progressive load-deformation curve in all planes.

Results

Various standard testing procedures (for example, ISO 18192–1 and ASTM F2364) and non-standard mechanical tests were carried out to prove the implant’s mechanical safety. Due to the new implant design, wear and creep testing was deemed most important. The wear rate for the PCU was in maximum 1.54 mg per million cycles. This value was within the range of the UHMWPE wear rates reported for other cervical disc prostheses (0.53 to 2.59 mg/million cycles). Also in the creep-relaxation test, a qualitatively physiological behavior was shown with a certain amount of remaining deformation but no failure.

Conclusion

The mechanical safety of the MOVE-C cervical disc prosthesis was shown to be comparable to other cervical disc prostheses. Since PCU wear particles were elsewhere shown to be less bioactive than cross-linked UHMWPE particles, wear-related failure in vivo may be less frequent compared to other prostheses. This, however, will have to be shown in further studies.

Lumbar and cervical viscoelastic disc replacement: Concepts and current experience

The ideal lumbar and cervical discs should provide six degrees of freedom and tri-planar (three-dimensional) motion. Although all artificial discs are intended to achieve the same goals, there is considerable heterogeneity in the design of lumbar and cervical implants. The “second generation total disc replacements” are non-articulating viscoelastic implants aiming at the reconstruction of physiologic levels of shock absorption and flexural stiffness. This review aims to give an overview of the available implants detailing the concepts and the functional results experimentally and clinically. These monobloc prostheses raise new challenges concerning the choice of materials for the constitution of the viscoelastic cushion, the connection between the components of the internal structure and the metal endplates and even the bone anchoring mode. New objectives concerning the quality of movement and mobility control must be defined.

Early Implant Failure of a 2-Level M6-Cervical Total Disc Replacement: A Case Report

CASE

We report a case of implant failure after primary 2-level M6-cervical disc replacement (M6-C; Spinal Kinetics) at C4-5 and C5-6. At revision surgery, a full-thickness tear was identified in the sheath of the C5-6 implant. Histology from periprosthetic tissue demonstrated polyethylene particles without acute inflammation. Tissue cultures were positive for Propionibacterium acnes, but ultrasonicate cultures were negative for both prostheses. An independent laboratory test confirmed mechanical failure of the C5-6 prosthesis.

CONCLUSION

This is the first report of mechanical failure associated with wear-debris osteolysis after M6-C disc arthroplasty. Therefore, continued surveillance after CTDR is necessary.

Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: Rationale and History

Biomechanical studies have demonstrated that cervical fusion results in increased motion and intradiscal pressures at adjacent levels. Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is an alternative treatment for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy resulting from degenerative disc disease. By maintaining segmental motion, surgeons hope to avoid some of the primary drawbacks of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), such as pseudoarthrosis and adjacent segment disease. First introduced in the 1960s, CDA has evolved over the years with changes to implant geometry and materials. Early devices produced suboptimal outcomes, but more recent generations of implants have shown long-term outcomes rivaling or even surpassing those of ACDF. In this article, the rationale for CDA as well as the history of such devices is reviewed.

M6-C cervical disc replacement failure associated with late onset infection

Cervical disc replacements are commonly used to treat degenerative disc disease. We present a case an M6-C disc replacement failure associated with Propionibacterium acnes infection three years post implantation.

Comparative Study Between M6-C and Mobi-C Cervical Artificial Disc Replacement: Biomechanical Outcomes and Comparison with Normative Data

OBJECTIVE

Cervical spondylosis affects a huge proportion of the middle-aged population. Degenerative changes can occur in multiple regions of the cervical spine typically affecting the joints, intervertebral discs and endplates. These changes lead to compression of adjacent nervous structures, which results in radiculopathic and myelopathic pain. Various treatment modalities are currently available with non-surgical approaches the initial go to if there is no symptomatic cord compression. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, or arthroplasty are the two common surgical approaches if non-surgical treatments fail to relieve symptoms of the patients or there are signs of central cord compression. However, studies have shown that there is an increased risk of adjacent segment disease related to fusion. Cervical disc arthroplasty aims to restore normal range of motion (ROM) in patients with pain and disability due to degenerative disc disease resistant to conservative care. Two common disc prostheses used include M6-C and Mobi-C. Both prostheses comprise a mobile polymer segment sandwiched between two metal endplates with mechanisms resembling an actual intervertebral disc. This study aims to compare the kinematics associated with these prostheses, against the normal range of motion in the non-degenerative population.

METHOD

Patients who underwent M6-C or Mobi-C disc replacements by the senior author from 2012 to 2015 were identified at a single tertiary institution. Routine 3-month postoperative lateral radiographs were analyzed for flexion and extension ROM angles at the involved vertebral level by two independent authors. Data was compared to previous published studies investigating cervical spine ROM of asymptomatic patients.

RESULTS

There was no statistical significance in the difference of overall flexion range between M6-C and Mobi-C prostheses. However, overall range of extension of Mobi-C was greater compared to M6-C (P = 0.028). At C_5-6 , the range of flexion for both implants were similar but lesser compared to asymptomatic patients (P < 0.001). Range of extension was greater in the Mobi-C group (14.2° ± 5.1°) compared to the M6-C (7.3° ± 4.6°) (P = 0.0009). At C_6-7 , there were no statistical differences in both range of flexion and extension between the two prostheses and asymptomatic patients (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The early results regarding restoration of ROM following cervical arthroplasty using either M6-C or Mobi-C prosthesis are encouraging. Long-term follow-up studies are necessary to observe the change in ROM over time with physiological loading and wear patterns.

Does Resection of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament Affect the Stability of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty?

Background

The need for posterior longitudinal ligament (PLL) resection during cervical total disc arthroplasty (TDA) has been debated. The purpose of this laboratory study was to investigate the effect of PLL resection on cervical kinematics after TDA.

Methods

Eight cadaveric cervical spine specimens were tested in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR) to moments of ±1.5 Nm. After testing the intact condition, anterior C5-C6 cervical discectomy was performed followed by PLL resection and implantation of a compressible, 6-degrees-of-freedom disc prosthesis (M6-C, Spinal Kinetics Inc, Sunnyvale, California). Next, a second prosthesis was implanted at C6-C7 with PLL intact. Finally, the C6-C7 PLL was resected while the disc prosthesis remained in place. Segmental range of motion (ROM) and stiffness in the high flexibility zone around the neutral posture were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA.

Results

At C5-C6, following TDA and PLL resection, FE, LB, and AR ROMs decreased significantly. Anterior and posterior disc height, segmental lordosis, and flexion stiffness increased significantly. At C6-C7, TDA with the PLL intact resulted in a significant increase in anterior disc height and segmental lordosis with no change in posterior disc height. FE, LB, and AR ROMs all decreased significantly, while flexion stiffness increased significantly compared to intact. PLL resection at C6-C7 did not result in a notable change compared to TDA with PLL intact. At the same level, flexion stiffness decreased following PLL resection compared to TDA with a value closer to intact. Two-level TDA (C5-C7) with PLL resection did not result in a loss of segmental stability.

Conclusion

PLL resection did not significantly affect motion segment kinematics following cervical TDA using a prosthesis with inherent stiffness. Motion segment stiffness loss after PLL resection can be compensated for by a TDA design that can provide resistance to angular motion.

Clinical experience and two-year follow-up with a one-piece viscoelastic cervical total disc replacement

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to present clinical outcome data from a 2-year post-market study of a viscoelastic one-piece cervical total disc replacement (TDR) in Europe.

METHODS

Thirty-nine patients were implanted at five surgical sites in an European post-market clinical study. Clinical outcomes included improvement of neck disability index (NDI) and visual analog scale scores for neck and arm pain from baseline to 2-year follow-up, neurological examinations, patients view on the success of surgery, complications, and subsequent surgical interventions.

RESULTS

Thirty patients had the Freedom^® Cervical Disc (FCD) implanted at a single level, and nine patients were implanted at two adjacent levels. The population had a similar distribution of male [20] and female [19] subjects, with a mean age of 45 years. All self-administered outcome measures showed significant clinically important improvements from baseline to the 2-year follow-up. Mean preoperative NDI score improved from 48% to 20%, 13%, 8%, 6% and 4% at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. Average preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores of the neck, right and left arm pain intensity and frequency showed significant improvement. All neurological outcome measurements showed immediate improvement from preoperative values and continued improvement throughout 2 years follow-up. From pre-op to 24 months, neurological deficits declined in the population from 21% to 6% for reflex function, 62% to 17% for sensory function, and 38% to 3% for motor function. No patients experienced a deterioration in any measured outcomes compared with the preoperative situation. Patient satisfaction increased over 2 years post-op, with 83% of patients responding that they would "definitely" choose to have the same treatment for their neck/arm condition and another 11% responding that they would "probably" choose to have the same treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The FCD performs as expected in patients with single-level and two-level degenerative disc disease.

[Analysis of the results of total cervical disc arthroplasty using a M6-C prosthesis: a multicenter study]

Cervical spondylosis and intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration are the most common cause for compression of the spinal cord and/or its roots. Total IVD arthroplasty, as a modern alternative to surgical treatment of IVD degeneration, is gaining popularity in many neurosurgical clinics around the world. Aim - the study aim was to conduct a multicenter analysis of cervical spine arthroplasty with an IVD prosthesis M6-C ('Spinal Kinetics', USA).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 112 patients (77 males and 35 females). All patients underwent single-level discectomy with implantation of the artificial IVD prosthesis M6-C. The follow-up period was up to 36 months. Dynamic assessment of the prosthesis was based on clinical parameters (pain intensity in the cervical spine and upper extremities (visual analog scale - VAS); quality of life (Neck Disability Index - NDI)); and subjective satisfaction with the results of surgical treatment (Macnab scale) and instrumental data (range of motion in the operated spinal motion segment, degree of heterotopic ossification (McAfee-Suchomel classification), and time course of degenerative changes in the adjacent segments).

Are Collapsed Cervical Discs Amenable to Total Disc Arthroplasty?: Analysis of Prospective Clinical Data With 2-Year Follow Up

STUDY DESIGN

Analysis of prospectively collected radiographic data.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the influence of preoperative index-level range of motion (ROM) and disc height on postoperative ROM after cervical total disc arthroplasty (TDA) using compressible disc prostheses.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Clinical studies demonstrate benefits of motion preservation over fusion; however, questions remain unanswered as to which preoperative factors have the ability to identify patients who are most likely to have good postoperative motion, which is the primary rationale for TDA.

METHODS

We analyzed prospectively collected data from a single-arm, multicenter study with 2-year follow up of 30 patients with 48 implanted levels. All received compressible cervical disc prostheses of 6 mm-height (M6C, Spinal Kinetics, Sunnyvale, CA). The influence of index-level preoperative disc height and ROM (each with two levels: below-median and above-median) on postoperative ROM was analyzed using 2 x 2 ANOVA. We further analyzed the radiographic outcomes of a subset of discs with preoperative height less than 3 mm, the so-called "collapsed" discs.

RESULTS

Shorter (3.0 ± 0.4 mm) discs were significantly less mobile preoperatively than taller (4.4 ± 0.5 mm) discs (6.7° vs. 10.5°, P = 0.01). The postoperative ROM did not differ between the shorter and taller discs (5.6° vs. 5.0°, P = 0.63). Tall discs that were less mobile preoperatively had significantly smaller postoperative ROM than short discs with above-median preoperative mobility (P < 0.05). The "collapsed discs" (n = 8) were less mobile preoperatively compared with all discs combined (5.1° vs. 8.6°, P < 0.01). These discs were distracted to more than two times the preoperative height, from 2.6 to 5.7 mm, and had significantly greater postoperative ROM than all discs combined (7.6° vs. 5.3°, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

We observed a significant interaction between preoperative index-level disc height and ROM in influencing postoperative ROM. Although limited by small sample size, the results suggest discs with preoperative height less than 3 mm may be amenable to disc arthroplasty using compressible disc prostheses.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Does design matter? Cervical disc replacements under review

The present article reviews the design rationale of currently available cervical disc replacements. Recent prospective randomized control trials comparing cervical disc replacement and anterior fusion have demonstrated safety as well as equal or superior clinical results. Increasingly, more devices are becoming available on the market. Understanding design rationale will provide context for the surgeon to optimize decision making for the most appropriate prosthesis. Cervical arthroplasty is a technique that is undergoing rapid design refinement and development. Further improvements in device design will enable patient-specific device selection. Understanding the design rationale and complication profile of each device will improve clinical and radiographic outcomes.

The M6-C Cervical Disk Prosthesis: First Clinical Experience in 33 Patients

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the short-term clinical succesrate of the M6-C cervical disk prosthesis in primary and secondary surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) provides an alternative to anterior cervical decompression and fusion for the treatment of spondylotic radiculopathy or myelopathy. The prevention of adjacent segment disease (ASD), a possible complication of anterior cervical decompression and fusion, is its most cited--although unproven--benefit. Unlike older arthroplasty devices that rely on a ball-and-socket-type design, the M6-C cervical disk prosthesis represents a new generation of unconstrained implants, developed to achieve better restoration of natural segmental biomechanics. This device should therefore optimize clinical performance of CDA and reduce ASD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients had preoperative computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging and postoperative x-rays. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Neck Disability Index, a Visual Analog Scale, and the SF-36 questionnaire. Patients were asked about overall satisfaction and whether they would have the surgery again.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients were evaluated 17.1 months after surgery, on average. Nine patients had a history of cervical interventions. Results for Neck Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale, and SF-36 were significantly better among patients who had undergone primary surgery. In this group, 87.5% of patients reported a good or excellent result and 91.7% would have the procedure again. In contrast, all 4 device-related complications occurred in the small group of patients who had secondary surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The M6-C prosthesis appears to be a valuable addition to the CDA armatorium. It generates very good results in patients undergoing primary surgery, although its use in secondary surgery should be avoided. Longer follow-up is needed to determine to what measure this device can prevent ASD.

Core herniation after implantation of a cervical artificial disc: case report

INTRODUCTION

Cervical artificial discs (CADs) represent an established surgical option in selected patients with cervical spinal disc degeneration. Though CADs have been available for many years, there is a lack of information concerning long-term safety, durability and implant-related failure rates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors describe the failure of a M6-C CAD (Spinal Kinetics, Sunnyvale, CA, USA).

RESULTS

Eight years after implantation of a CAD of the M6 type, a 39-year-old female presented with new clinical signs of cervical myelopathy. Radiologically, medullar compression due to posterior core herniation was the suspected cause. The damaged CAD was removed and the segment fused. During revision surgery, rupture of the posterior structures could be detected. Possible mechanisms leading to implant failure are discussed.

CONCLUSION

As there is no standard regarding clinical and radiological follow-up for patients with CADs, radiological long-term follow-up investigations seem to be justified for exclusion of implant failure.