다음과 같은 기능을 한번의 로그인으로 사용 할 수 있습니다.
NTIS 바로가기
Spine, v.43 no.3, 2018년, pp.E163 - E170
Zhou, Feifei (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China) , Ju, Kevin L. (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA) , Zhao, Yanbin (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China) , Zhang, Fengshan (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China) , Pan, Shengfa (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China) , Heller, John G. (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA) , Sun, Yu (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.)
STUDY DESIGN.: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE.: Our objective was to examine the prevalence, clinical significance, ramifications, and possible etiology of postoperative bone formation at the index level after cervical disc replacement (CDR) with a minimum of 5 years of follow-up. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: CDR can be complicated by postoperative ossification and unwanted ankylosis at the index level, which some authors have termed “heterotopic ossification.” This terminology may be inaccurate as it assumes the postoperative bone formation is unnatural and a consequence of the CDR surgery. We advocate that this phenomenon has more to do with individual patient factors rather than the surgery. METHODS.: Patients who underwent Bryan CDR for cervical myelopathy or radiculopathy between 12/2003 and 8/2008 with a minimum of 5-years follow-up were analyzed. They were divided into two groups, those with and without postoperative bone formation. Patient-reported outcomes (Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, Neck Disability Index, Visual Analogue Scale for neck and arm pain) and radiographic parameters were collected pre- and postoperatively and compared between groups. RESULTS.: Sixty-one patients (76 levels) were identified (mean follow-up 94.2 mo). The overall incidence of postoperative ossification was 50%. Both groups had sustained significant improvements across all patient-reported outcome measures at final follow-up. Notably, patients with more severe preoperative cervical spondylosis had higher rates of postoperative ossification (P = 0.036) and adjacent segment degeneration (P = 0.010). CONCLUSION.: Although the long-term incidence of postoperative bone formation after CDR was relatively high, this did not adversely affect patient outcomes. Patients with more severe preoperative spondylosis had higher rates of postoperative ossification, suggesting that postoperative ossification at the CDR segment is likely one of progressive bone formation in individuals already predisposed to forming bone rather than one of alleged heterotopic ossification as a consequence of the surgery.Level of Evidence: 3
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Eck 27 2431 2002 10.1097/00007632-200211150-00003 Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion
J Bone Joint Surg Am Hilibrand 81 519 1999 10.2106/00004623-199904000-00009 Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis
J Neurosurg Spine Robertson 3 417 2005 10.3171/spi.2005.3.6.0417 Assessment of adjacent-segment disease in patients treated with cervical fusion or arthroplasty: a prospective 2-year study
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Anderson 33 1305 2008 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31817329a1 Comparison of adverse events between the Bryan artificial cervical disc and anterior cervical arthrodesis
J Spinal Disord Tech Sasso 20 481 2007 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3180310534 Clinical outcomes of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial with 24-month follow-up
Eur Spine J Chen 21 674 2011 10.1007/s00586-011-2094-x Prevalence of heterotopic ossification after cervical total disc arthroplasty: a meta-analysis
Neurosurgery Leung 57 759 2005 10.1227/01.NEU.0000175856.31210.58 Clinical significance of heterotopic ossification in cervical disc replacement: a prospective multicenter clinical trial
Spine J Lee 10 676 2010 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.04.017 Analysis of the incidence and clinical effect of the heterotopic ossification in a single-level cervical artificial disc replacement
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Yi 35 1556 2010 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c6526b Difference in occurrence of heterotopic ossification according to prosthesis type in the cervical artificial disc replacement
Skeletal Radiol McCarthy 34 609 2005 10.1007/s00256-005-0958-z Heterotopic ossification: a review
J Rehabil Med Vanden Bossche 37 129 2005 10.1080/16501970510027628 Heterotopic ossification: a review
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) McAfee 30 1576 2005 10.1097/01.brs.0000170561.25636.1c 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
Ann Rheum Dis Kellgren 16 494 1957 10.1136/ard.16.4.494 Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis
J Rheumatol Suppl Menkes 27 13 1991 Radiographic criteria for classification of osteoarthritis
Eur Spine J Kim 18 218 2009 10.1007/s00586-008-0854-z Comparison of radiographic changes after ACDF versus Bryan disc arthroplasty in single and bi-level cases
Chin Med J Zhao 126 3809 2013 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20131733 Cervical disc arthroplasty with ProDisc-C artificial disc: 5-year radiographic follow-up results
Eur Spine J Suchomel 19 307 2010 10.1007/s00586-009-1259-3 Clinical results and development of heterotopic ossification in total cervical disc replacement during a 4-year follow-up
Spine J Murrey 9 275 2009 10.1016/j.spinee.2008.05.006 Results of the prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-C total disc replacement versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of 1-level symptomatic cervical disc disease
Spine J Alvin 14 2231 2014 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.03.047 Cervical arthroplasty: a critical review of the literature
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Quan 36 639 2011 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181dc9b51 Eight-year clinical and radiological follow-up of the Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Zhou 40 E332 2015 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000776 Does heterotopic ossification affect the outcomes of cervical total disc replacement? A Meta-analysis
Evid Based Spine Care J Barbagallo 1 15 2010 10.1055/s-0028-1100888 Heterotopic ossification in cervical disc arthroplasty: is it clinically relevant?
J Spinal Disord Tech Sasso 21 393 2008 10.1097/BSD.0b013e318150d121 Motion analysis of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior discectomy and fusion: results from a prospective, randomized, multicenter, clinical trial
Acta Neurochir Chung 154 1017 2012 10.1007/s00701-012-1309-1 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
J Neurosurg Spine Wu 16 163 2012 10.3171/2011.10.SPINE11497 Differences between soft-disc herniation and spondylosis in cervical arthroplasty: CT-documented heterotopic ossification with minimum 2 years of follow-up
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Gore 26 2463 2001 10.1097/00007632-200111150-00013 Roentgenographic findings in the cervical spine in asymptomatic persons: a ten-year follow-up
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Lee 37 (22 suppl) S18 2012 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31826cac62 The natural history of degeneration of the lumbar and cervical spines: a systematic review
Orthopedics Mavrogenis 34 177 2011 10.3928/01477447-20110124-08 Heterotopic ossification revisited
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Dmitriev 30 1165 2005 10.1097/01.brs.0000162441.23824.95 Adjacent level intradiscal pressure and segmental kinematics following a cervical total disc arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Cepoiu-Martin 36 E1623 2011 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182163814 Artificial cervical disc arthroplasty
J Spinal Disord Tech Garrido 23 367 2010 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181bb8568 Clinical outcomes of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty a prospective, randomized, controlled, single site trial with 48-month follow-up
J Neurosurg Spine Mummaneni 6 198 2007 10.3171/spi.2007.6.3.198 Clinical and radiographic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial
Spine J Jawahar 10 1043 2010 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.08.014 Total disc arthroplasty does not affect the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical spine: results of 93 patients in three prospective randomized clinical trials
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Harrod 37 (22 suppl) S96 2012 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31826cb2d6 Adjacent segment pathology following cervical motion-sparing procedures or devices compared with fusion surgery: a systematic review
해당 논문의 주제분야에서 활용도가 높은 상위 5개 콘텐츠를 보여줍니다.
더보기 버튼을 클릭하시면 더 많은 관련자료를 살펴볼 수 있습니다.
Copyright KISTI. All Rights Reserved.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.