Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-pwrkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-19T01:48:25.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Artificial Disc Insertion Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2014

Gwynedd E. Pickett  and
Neil Duggal
Gwynedd E. Pickett
Affiliation:
Division of Neurosurgery, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada
Neil Duggal
Affiliation:
Division of Neurosurgery, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective and importance:

Fusion following anterior cervical discectomy has been implicated in the acceleration of degenerative changes in the adjacent spinal segments. Discectomy followed by implantation of an artificial cervical disc maintains the functionality of the spinal unit, while still providing excellent symptomatic relief. We describe our preliminary experience with implantation of the Bryan Cervical Disc System in two cases of single-level cervical disc herniation.

Clinical presentation:

Two male patients presented with a left C6 radiculopathy, without evidence of myelopathy. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed a disc herniation at C5-6 in both cases. Pre-operative flexion and extension radiographs demonstrated preserved motion at the involved levels.

Intervention/technique:

Following a standard anterior cervical decompression, precision drilling of the vertebral endplates was carried out using a drill attached to a bed-mounted, gravitationally-referenced retraction frame. An artificial cervical disc, composed of a polyurethane nucleus with titanium endplates, was fitted between the contoured endplates without fixation to the vertebral bodies. No complications were experienced during the insertion of the prosthesis, or in the postoperative course. Both patients experienced immediate postoperative resolution of their radicular pain and were discharged from hospital the following day. At nine months following surgery, both patients continue to have complete relief of radicular symptoms. Postoperative radiographs at six months following surgery confirm accurate placement of the prosthesis and preserved mobility of the functional spinal unit.

Conclusion:

Insertion of the Bryan artificial cervical disc prosthesis following anterior cervical discectomy is a relatively straightforward procedure, which appears to be safe and provides good clinical results, without requiring additional surgical time. Long-term follow-up is required to assess its safety, efficacy, and ability to prevent adjacent segment degeneration.

Résumé:

RÉSUMÉ:Objectif et importance:

Il semble qu’une fusion vertébrale suite à une discectomie cervicale antérieure puisse accélérer les changements dégénératifs au niveau des segments spinaux adjacents. La discectomie suivie de l’implantation d’un disque artificiel maintient la fonction du segment spinal tout en assurant un excellent soulagement des symptômes. Nous décrivons notre expérience d’implantation du Bryan Cervical Disc System chez deux cas de hernie discale cervicale.

Étude de cas:

Il s’agit de deux patients présentant une radiculopathie C6 gauche sans manifestation de myélopathie. L’imagerie par résonance magnétique a montré une hernie discale au niveau de C5-C6 dans les deux cas. Des radiographies prises en flexion et en extension avant la chirurgie ont montré une amplitude de mouvement normale à ces niveaux.

Technique opératoire:

Après décompression cervicale antérieure par la technique standard, les plateaux vertébraux ont été préparés au moyen d’une aléseuse. Un disque cervical artificiel composé d’un noyau de polyuréthane avec des plateaux en titanium a été inséré entre les plateaux vertébraux profilés sans être fixé aux corps vertébraux, sans complication intra ou postopératoire. La douleur radiculaire est disparu immédiatement après la chirurgie et ils ont quitté l’hôpital le lendemain de la chirurgie. Neuf mois plus tard, aucun des deux patients n’a présenté de récidive de la douleur radiculaire. Des radiographies faites six mois après la chirurgie ont confirmé que la prothèse était en bonne position et que la mobilité de l’aunité spinale fonctionnelle était préservée.

Conclusions:

L’insertion d’une prothèse de Bryan après une discectomie cervicale antérieure est une intervention relativement simple qui semble sûre et dont les résultats cliniques sont bons, sans toutefois prolonger l’intervention. Ces patients devront être suivis à long terme afin d’évaluer la sécurité, l’efficacité et l’influence de cette intervention sur la dégénérescence des segments adjacents.

Type
Case Report
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , August 2003 , pp. 278 - 283
Copyright
Copyright © The Canadian Journal of Neurological 2003

References

1. Cloward, RB. The anterior approach for removal of ruptured cervical discs. J Neurosurg 1958;15:602–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Robinson, RA, Smith, GW. Anterolateral cervical disc removal and interbody fusion for cervical disc syndrome. Bull Johns Hopkins Hosp 1955;96:223–224.Google Scholar
3. Bose, B. Anterior cervical fusion using Caspar plating: analysis of results and review of the literature. Surg Neurol 1998;49:25–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Clements, DH, O’Leary, PF. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine 1990;15:1023–1025.Google Scholar
5. DePalma, AF, Rothman, RH, Lewinnek, GE, Canale, ST. Anterior interbody fusion for severe cervical disc degeneration. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1972;134:755–758.Google Scholar
6. Gore, DR, Sepic, SB. Anterior cervical fusion for degenerated or protruded discs: a review of one hundred forty-six patients. Spine 1984;9:667–671.Google Scholar
7. Jacobs, B, Krueger, EG, Leivy, DM. Cervical spondylosis with radiculopathy: results of anterior discectomy and interbody fusion. JAMA 1970;211:2135–2139.Google Scholar
8. Lunsford, LD, Bissonette, DJ, Janetta, PJ, Sheptak, PE, Zorub, DS. Anterior surgery for cervical disc disease. Part 1: Treatment of lateral cervical disc herniation in 253 cases. J Neurosurg 1980;53:1–11.Google Scholar
9. 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 1958;40A:607–623.Google Scholar
10. Matsunaga, S, Kabayama, S, Yamamoto, T, et al. Strain on intervertebral discs after anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Spine 1999;24:670–675.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Baba, H, Furusawa, N, Imura, S, et al. Late radiographic findings after anterior cervical fusion for spondylotic myeloradiculopathy. Spine 1993;18:2167–2173.Google Scholar
12. Hilibrand, AS, Carlson, GD, Palumbo, M, Jones, PK, Bohlman, HH. Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 1999;81:519–528.Google Scholar
13. Wigfield, C, Gill, S, Nelson, R, et al. Influence of an artificial cervical joint compared with fusion on adjacent-level motion in the treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. J Neurosurg 2002;(Spine 1) 96:17–21.Google Scholar
14. Gore, DR, Gardner, GM, Sepic, SB, Murray, MP. Roentgenographic findings following anterior cervical fusion. Skeletal Radiol 1986;15:556–559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Wu, W, Thuomas, KA, Hedlund, R, Leszniewski, W, Vavruch, L. Degenerative changes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion evaluated by fast spin-echo MR imaging. Acta Radiol 1996;37:614–617.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16. Cherubino, P, Benazzo, F, Borromeo, U, Perle, S. Degenerative arthritis of the adjacent spinal joint following anterior cervical spinal fusion: clinicoradiologic and statistical correlations. Ital J Orthop Trauma 1990;16:533–543.Google Scholar
17. Dohler, JR, Kahn, MR, Hughes, SP. Instability of the cervical spine after anterior interbody fusion. A study on its incidence and clinical significance in 21 patients. Arch Orth Trauma Surg 1985;104:247–250.Google Scholar
18. McGrory, BJ, Klassen, RA. Arthrodesis of the cervical spine for fractures and dislocations in children and adolescents. A long-term follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1994;76:1606–1616.Google Scholar
19. Hunter, LY, Braunstein, EM, Bailey, RW. Radiographic changes following anterior cervical fusion. Spine 1980;5:399–401.Google Scholar
20. Bohlman, HH, Emery, SE, Goodfellow, DB, Jones, PK. Robinson anterior cervical discectomy and arthrodesis for cervical radiculopathy. Long-term follow-up of one hundred and twenty-two patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993;75:1298–1307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21. Hilibrand, AS, Yoo, JU, Carlson, GD, Bohlman, HH. The success of anterior cervical arthrodesis adjacent to a previous fusion. Spine 1997;22:1574–1579.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22. Kumaresan, S, Yoganandan, N, Pintar, F. Finite Element analysis of anterior cervical interbody fusion. Bio Med Mat Eng 1997; 7:221–230.Google Scholar
23. Goffin, J, van Loon, J, Van Calenbergh, F, Plets, C. Long-term results after anterior cervical fusion and osteosynthetic stabilization for fractures and/or dislocations of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord 1995;8:500–508.Google Scholar
24. Yonenobu, K, Okada, K, Fuji, T, et al. Causes of neurologic deterioration following surgical treatment of cervical myelopathy. Spine 1986;11:818–823.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25. Emery, SE, Bohlmann, HH, Bolesta, MJ, Jones, PK. Anterior cervical decompression and arthrodesis for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Two to seventeen-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998; 80:941–951.Google Scholar
26. Geisler, FH, Caspar, W, Pitzen, T, Johnson, TA. Reoperation in patients after anterior cervical plate stabilization in degenerative disease. Spine 1998;23:911–920.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27. Fuller, DA, Kirkpatrick, JS, Emery, SE, et al. A kinematic study of the cervical spine before and after segmental arthrodesis. Spine 1998;23:1649–1656.Google Scholar
28. Cummins, BH, Robertson, JT, Gill, SS. Surgical experience with an implanted artificial cervical joint. J Neurosurg 1998;88:943–948.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29. Pointillart, V. Cervical disc prosthesis in humans: first failure. Spine 2001;26:E90–E92.Google Scholar
30. Goffin, J, Casey, A, Kehr, P, et al. Preliminary clinical experience with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis. Neurosurgery 2002;51:840–847.Google Scholar