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

Spine

IS DYNAMIC CERVICAL DISC REPLACEMENT AN ALTERNATIVE TO ACDF?

Britspine, British Scoliosis Society (BSS), Society for Back Pain Research (SBPR), British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS)



Abstract

The aim of most new implants for cervical disc replacement is to maintain or restore function. The Dynamic Cervical Implant (DCI(tm), Paradigm Spine) aims at combining the advantages of the gold standard fusion technique with the motion preservation philosophy. DCI has a limited motion: it works like a shock absorbing spring and may help to slow down adjacent segment degeneration.

Between 2007 and 2009 we selected 79 patients aged 32 to 73 years for treatment with DCI at either one or two levels (10 patients). Indications were radiculopathies (n=45), axial pain (n=4) or spondylotic spinal stenosis (n=30) with out chronic myelopathy. Patients are followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.

Disc surgery was performed at C3/C4 (n=2), C4/5 (n=6), at C5/6 (n=43), C6/7 (n=37) and at C7/T1 (n=1). In flexion/extension radiographs motion rapidly increased after surgery. However, 5 of 19 treated levels were fused (seen at 6 or 12 months). After implant footprint was changed and larger sizes were provided only 2 of 67 segments fused. Still 96% of the patients rated their clinical result as excellent or good. There were no implant related complications or revision surgery.

Disc replacement with DCI is a new strategy that is positioned in between anterior cervical fusion and disc prosthesis. Clinical results are as good as in anterior cervical fusion. Adjacent segment protection must be judged in future follow-ups. We were able to show that the change of implant footprint has significantly reduced fusion rate.