header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RANGE OF MOTION AND CLINICAL OUTCOME AFTER LUMBAR DISC REPLACEMENT: NINE YEARS FOLLOW-UP



Abstract

Purpose of the study: The theoretical advantage of a disc prosthesis compared with fusion is to preserve spinal mobility. The purpose of our study was to determine the relationship, at nine years follow-up, between range of motion and clinical outcome after lumbar disc replacement.

Material and methods: This retrospective analysis concerned the clinical and radiographic outcome observed in 38 patients who had undergone one- or two-stage disc replacement surgery (51 implanted prostheses). Mean follow-up was 8.6 years (range 6.9–10.7). Clinical outcome was assessed with the Stauffer-Coventry modified score (SCM), the Oswestry score (ODQ) and a visual analog scale (VAS) for lumbar and radicular pain. Flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) was measured on the upright films (Cobb method) at last follow-up. Each clinical element was compared with the ROM (Spearman coefficient of correlation). Two groups of patients were distinguished: high (> 5°) and low ≤ 5°) ROM for comparison with the Mann-Whitney test.

Results: The Spearman coefficient of correlation disclosed a weak to moderate but statistically significant association between ROM, lumbar VAS (r=−0.35, p=0.034), ODQ (r=−0.33, p=0.046), SCM (r=0.42, p=0.0095); but no significant correlation between ROM and radicular VAS (r=−0.12,p=0.48). Patients with greater ROM had better clinical results and ODQ (mean difference 6.3 points, p=0.031) and SCM (mean difference 2.2 points, p=0.017); but no significant difference between the preoperative characteristics in each group (age, sex, weight, surgical history, lumbar and radicular pain, ODQ and SCM).

Discussion: There are no data in the literature comparing range of motion and clinical outcome after lumbar disc replacement. The present study demonstrated a weak to moderate but statistically significant relationship (r=0.35) between range of flexion-extension motion and clinical outcome at nine years. In addition, patients with lesser ROM (< 5°) have slightly less favorable results compared with those with greater ROM (> 5°). This study suggests the preservation of motion has a positive effect on mid-term clinical outcome.

Conclusion: These results need to be confirmed with long-term prospective data comparing discal prosthesis with fusion and non-surgical treatment in order to demonstrate the usefulness of preserving motion on the quality of the clinical outcome.

Correspondence should be addressed to SOFCOT, 56 rue Boissonade, 75014 Paris, France.