uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Artificial Disc Replacement versus Fusion in Patients with Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease with radiculopathy ‒ 5-year Outcomes
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9231-7608
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Radiology.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5503-1793
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences.
Institutionen för lärande, informatik, management och etik. Department for learning, informatics, management and ethics.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9901-6886
Show others and affiliations
2018 (English)In: Article in journal (Refereed) Submitted
Abstract [en]

Background: The evidence is limited for long-term efficacy of artificial disc replacement surgery compared with fusion after decompression for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease and radiculopathy.

Methods: We randomly assigned 153 patients (mean age 47 years) with single- or double-level cervical degenerative disc disease and radiculopathy to receive either anterior cervical discectomy artificial disc replacement (ADR, n=83) or fusion (n=70). Outcomes after 5 years were assessed using patient-reported outcome measures, motion preservation and heterotopic ossification by radiographs, adjacent segment pathology by magnetic resonance imaging and secondary surgery procedures. The primary outcome was the Neck Disability Index (NDI), a patient-reported function score that ranges from 0 to 100%, with higher scores indicating greater disability.

Results: Scores on the NDI were approximately halved in both groups: mean score after 5 years was 36 (95% CI 31-41) in the ADR group and 31 (95% CI 25-37) in the fusion group (P=0.36). There were no other differences between the groups in six other patient-related outcome measures. Fifty-percent of the patients in the ADR group preserved motion at the operated cervical level and 25% were spontaneously fused. Seventeen (21%) ADR and seven (10%) fusion patients underwent secondary surgery (p=0.11), with five patients in each group due to clinical adjacent segment pathology.

Conclusion: In patients with cervical degenerative disc disease and radiculopathy decompression plus ADR surgery did not result in better clinical or radiological outcomes after 5 years compared with decompression and fusion surgery.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018.
Keywords [en]
Cervical radiculopathy, Artificial disc replacement, Surgical treatment outcome, Anterior decompression and fusion
National Category
Orthopaedics
Research subject
Orthopaedics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-345965OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-345965DiVA, id: diva2:1190049
Projects
Cervical radiculopathy, studies on pain analysis and treatmentAvailable from: 2018-03-13 Created: 2018-03-13 Last updated: 2018-03-13
In thesis
1. Cervical Radiculopathy: Studies on Pain Analysis and Treatment
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Cervical Radiculopathy: Studies on Pain Analysis and Treatment
2018 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Background: Knowledge about how to interpret pain-analyzing tools such as the pain drawing test and the visual analog scale (VAS) in cervical spine patients are sparse; hence, they have never been validated for this subgroup of patients. The method of artificial disc replacement (ADR) has been developed as an alternative treatment to fusion surgery after decompression for cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD) with radiculopathy. Preserved motion of ADR devices aims to prevent immobilization side effects such as stiffness, dysphagia and adjacent segment pathology. Long-term follow-ups of these devices compared with the gold standard treatment are needed to create future guidelines.

Objectives: This thesis aims at (1) validating the pain drawing as an investigational tool for the cervical spine, (2) validating the VAS for the cervical spine regarding the measurement noise and the minimum clinically important difference (MCID), (3) comparing ADR with fusion surgery at 5-years of follow-up regarding outcome and complications in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) as well as in the Swedish spine (Swespine) registry, and (4) investigating possible predictors to outcome after surgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy.

Methods: An RCT with 153 patients undergoing surgery for cervical radiculopathy was performed. Baseline data, the Neck disability index (NDI), two sets of VAS-neck and VAS-arm scores, the EQ-5D, Hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS), Dysphagia short questionnaire and a pain drawing test were gathered preoperatively and after 5 years. Radiographs in flexion/extension and MRIs were done preoperatively and at follow-up. All patients registered in Swespine since January 1st, 2006 with cervical DDD and radiculopathy treated with ADR or fusion surgery, were included. Baseline data, the NDI, EQ-5D, and VAS-neck and VAS-arm scores were analyzed at 1, 2, 5 and 10-years of follow-up as well as the information regarding secondary surgeries.

Results: Pain drawings interpreted with the simple body region method showed good inter-rater reliability in cervical spine patients. Markings in the upper arm region on the pain drawing predicted surgical treatment outcome and markings in the head region predicted depression. The measurement noise was ~10 mm and the MCID was ~20 mm on a 100 mm pain VAS. In both the RCT and Swespine register the outcome after ADR surgery were comparable with fusion at 5 years of follow-up, except for an elevated risk regarding secondary surgery on the index level in the ADR group. Fifty percent of the patients in the RCT, allocated to ADR surgery had preserved motion of less than 5°, at the 5-year follow-up, and 25%, mostly men were spontaneously fused. Preserved motion did not prevent adjacent segment pathology. High values of preoperative HADS scores were negative predictors of outcome.

Conclusions: In patients with cervical DDD and radiculopathy both the pain drawing test and the VAS are validated tools to interpret the patients’ pain. Preoperative mental distress affects long-term outcome much more than the allocated treatment, ADR or fusion surgery in patients with cervical radiculopathy.

Clinical Trial Registration: ISRCTN, registration number: 44347115.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2018. p. 111
Series
Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Medicine, ISSN 1651-6206 ; 1442
Keywords
Cervical radiculopahy, Artificial disc replacement
National Category
Orthopaedics
Research subject
Orthopaedics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-345977 (URN)978-91-513-0272-0 (ISBN)
Public defence
2018-05-05, Gustavianum, Akademigatan 3, Uppsala, 13:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2018-04-10 Created: 2018-03-13 Last updated: 2018-04-10

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
MacDowall, AnnaCanto Moreira, NunoSkeppholm, MartinRobinson, YohanLöfgren, HåkanMichaëlsson, KarlOlerud, Claes
By organisation
Department of Surgical SciencesRadiology
Orthopaedics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 261 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf