1 / 18

ARTIFICIAL DISC VERSUS FUSION

ARTIFICIAL DISC VERSUS FUSION. A prospective randomised study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients. Study design. 115 patients were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to a Bryan artificial disc replacement (56) or an anterior cervical fusion with allograft and a plate (59). Objective.

stella
Download Presentation

ARTIFICIAL DISC VERSUS FUSION

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ARTIFICIAL DISC VERSUS FUSION A prospective randomised study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients

  2. Study design • 115 patients were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to a Bryan artificial disc replacement (56) or an anterior cervical fusion with allograft and a plate (59).

  3. Objective • To examine the functional outcome and radiographic results of this trial to determine the role of the Bryan artificial cervical disc replacement for patients with 1-level cervical disc disease.

  4. Background data • Artificial cervical disc replacement has become an option for cervical radiculopathy. This study is a pooled data set from 3 centres involved in the U.S . FDA investigational Device Exemption Trial evaluating the Bryan artificial disc.

  5. Methods • Inclusion criteria: 1-level cervical disc disease in C3-C7, age > 21, failure of conservative care 6 weeks, NDI > 30%. • Exclusion criteria: significant anatomic deformity, previous procedures at the operative level. • 12 months follow-up was available for 110 patients and 24 months follow-up complete for 99.

  6. ...cont’d • Disability and pain were assessed using the Neck Disability Index(NDI) and the Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) of the neck and arm pain. SF-36 outcome measures were obtained including the physical and mental component scores. • Range of motion was determined by radiologic assessment of flexion-extension radiographs. • Prospective data was collected before surgery and at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery.

  7. Results

  8. Complications • Control group: 1 patient required posterior cervical fusion for non-union, 1 required revision ACDF for non-union, and 2 required ACDF for adjacent level disease. • Bryan group: 2 required ACDF for adjacent level disease.

  9. Conclusions.. • The Bryan artificial disc replacement compares favourably to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of patients with 1-level cervical disc disease. • At the 2-year follow-up, there are statistically significant differences between the groups with improvement in the NDI, the neck pain and arm pain VAS scores, and the SF-36 physical component score in the Bryan disc population.

  10. ..cont’d • There were no intra-operative complications, no vascular or neurologic complications, no spontaneous fusions, and no device failures or explantations in the Bryan cohort. • The disc replacement group retained an average of 7.9° of flexion-extension at 24 months.

  11. THANK YOU

More Related