Revision surgeries following artificial disc replacement of cervical spine
- Authors
- Park, Jong-Beom; Chang, Han; Yeom, Jin S.; Suk, Kyung-Soo; Lee, Dong-Ho; Lee, Jae Chul
- Issue Date
- Dec-2016
- Publisher
- Turk Ortopedi ve Travmatoloji Dernegi
- Keywords
- Revision surgeries; Artificial disc replacement; Cervical spine
- Citation
- Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, v.50, no.6, pp 610 - 618
- Pages
- 9
- Journal Title
- Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica
- Volume
- 50
- Number
- 6
- Start Page
- 610
- End Page
- 618
- URI
- https://scholarworks.bwise.kr/sch/handle/2021.sw.sch/8590
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.aott.2016.04.004
- ISSN
- 1017-995X
- Abstract
- Objective: We investigated causes and results of revision surgeries after artificial disc replacement of cervical spine (C-ADR). Methods: Twenty-one patients (mean age: 52.8) who underwent revision surgery after C-ADR and who had a minimum 2-year of follow-up were included into this study. The mean time between the primary and revision surgeries was 21 months. During their primary surgeries, 14 patients underwent single level C-ADR, 2 two-level C-ADR, and 5 two-level hybrid surgery for 16 radiculopathy, 3 myelopathy, and 2 adjacent segment diseases. Causes for revision surgeries were at least one of the followings: 17 poor patient selections, 7 insufficient decompressions, 7 malpositions, 6 subsidences, 3 osteolysis, and 1 postoperative infection. Results: Sixteen patients underwent anterior removal of C-ADR, one-level discectomy and fusion (N = 11), two-level discectomy (N = 3) or one-level corpectomy (N = 2) and fusion. Three patients of keel type C-ADR with heterotopic ossification underwent posterior laminoforaminotomy and fusion. Two patients underwent combined procedures due to infection or severe subsidence and osteolysis. At the 2year follow-up, neck (7.3 vs 1.6) and arm (7.0 vs 1.3) visual analog scales and Neck Disability Index score (46.7 vs 16.32) were improved (all, p < 0.05). According to Odom's criteria, 86% of the patients were satisfied and 91% achieved solid fusion. No major complications developed except for transient dysphagia in 6 patients (29%). Conclusions: In this small case series, revision surgeries provided successful outcomes in failed C-ADR without major complications. Careful patient selection and meticulous surgical techniques are important to avoid disappointing clinical outcome or even failure of C-ADR. (C) 2016 Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. Publishing services by Elsevier B. V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.
- Files in This Item
- There are no files associated with this item.
- Appears in
Collections - College of Medicine > Department of Orthopedic Surgery > 1. Journal Articles
Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.