Revision surgeries following artificial disc replacement of cervical spine
Jong‐Beom Park, Han Chang, Jin S. Yeom, Kyung‐Soo Suk, Dong‐Ho Lee, Jae Chul Lee
Abstract
Open-access reader
Jong‐Beom Park, Han Chang, Jin S. Yeom, Kyung‐Soo Suk, Dong‐Ho Lee, Jae Chul Lee
Abstract
Open-access reader
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 2-year 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. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Therapeutic study.
OpenAlex reports 38 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
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 2-year 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. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Therapeutic study.
Key concepts: Medicine, Surgery, Corpectomy, Heterotopic ossification, Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, Osteolysis, Neck pain, Discectomy