Article
Long-term follow up after implantation of cervical disc prostheses
Search Medline for
Authors
-
Ali Rashidi
- Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Magdeburg, Deutschland; Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Magdeburg, Deutschland
-
Lena Zimmermann
- Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Magdeburg, Deutschland
-
Raimund Firsching
- Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Magdeburg, Deutschland; Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Magdeburg, Deutschland; Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Magdeburg, Deutschland
| Published: | June 18, 2018 |
|---|
Outline
Text
Objective: Intervertebral cervical disc prostheses have now routinely been implanted for more than 15 years, but long-term results are scarce. We report a follow up period of 10 to 13 years postoperatively in73 patients with an implanted BRYAN® prosthesis.
Methods: In a prospective study we analysed the charts of 100 patients, who were then contacted with a questionnaire.
Results: The feedback from the questionnaires was 735.
39.7% of the patients showed very good and 46.6% good results with regard to pain sensations in the cervical spine area. In 54.8% of patients, the results were very good in terms of pain radiating into the arms and good in 37.0% of patients. The results of neurological disorders in 53.4% of patients were in the very good range and in 38.4% of patients in the good range. Of the patients who only had herniated discs in the operated segment and did not report any further disc disease, 71.9% showed very good and 25.0% good results with regard to pain of the cervical spine. We found a significant improvement of pain and neurological disorders compared to preoperative. The number of patients taking analgesics decreased significantly from preoperative 81.0% to 36.2% currently. 43.8% of the patients were not restricted in the movement of the head and neck to the front and back. 46.6% were moderately restricted. After the operation mobility of head and neck was not restricted at all in 35.6% of patients and was moderately restricted in 52.1% of patients. 79.5% of patients would have the same operation performed again.
Radiological functional repeated radiographs confirmed preserved motion in 75.0% of the patients in the operated segment were mobile. 8.2% of the patients developed adjacent level disease and were subsequently operated in the adjacent segments. In one case the prosthesis had to be removed.
Conclusion: Our results show that the BRYAN® prosthesis is at least equivalent to established procedures. The majority of the fusion patients reported improvement in terms of morbidity and complication even after a long period of observation.
