Gornet Matthew F, Lanman Todd H, Burkus J Kenneth, Dryer Randall F, McConnell Jeffrey R, Hodges Scott D, Schranck Francine W
1The Orthopedic Center of St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
2Institute for Spinal Disorders, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
J Neurosurg Spine. 2019 Jun 21;31(4):508-518. doi: 10.3171/2019.4.SPINE19157. Print 2019 Oct 1.
OBJECTIVE: The authors assessed the 10-year clinical safety and effectiveness of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) to treat degenerative cervical spine disease at 2 adjacent levels compared to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). METHODS: A prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter FDA-approved clinical trial was conducted comparing the low-profile titanium ceramic composite-based Prestige LP Cervical Disc (n = 209) at two levels with ACDF (n = 188). Ten-year follow-up data from a postapproval study were available on 148 CDA and 118 ACDF patients and are reported here. Clinical and radiographic evaluations were completed preoperatively, intraoperatively, and at regular postoperative follow-up intervals for up to 10 years. The primary endpoint was overall success, a composite variable that included key safety and efficacy considerations. Ten-year follow-up rates were 86.0% for CDA and 84.9% for ACDF. RESULTS: From 2 to 10 years, CDA demonstrated statistical superiority over ACDF for overall success, with rates at 10 years of 80.4% versus 62.2%, respectively (posterior probability of superiority [PPS] = 99.9%). Neck Disability Index (NDI) success was also superior, with rates at 10 years of 88.4% versus 76.5% (PPS = 99.5%), as was neurological success (92.6% vs 86.1%; PPS = 95.6%). Improvements from preoperative results in NDI and neck pain scores were consistently statistically superior for CDA compared to ACDF. All other study effectiveness measures were at least noninferior for CDA compared to ACDF through the 10-year follow-up period, including disc height. Mean angular ranges of motion at treated levels were maintained in the CDA group for up to 10 years. The rates of grade IV heterotopic ossification (HO) at the superior and inferior levels were 8.2% and 10.3%, respectively. The rate of severe HO (grade III or IV) did not increase significantly from 7 years (42.4%) to 10 years (39.0%). The CDA group had fewer serious (grade 3-4) implant-related or implant/surgical procedure-related adverse events (3.8% vs 8.1%; posterior mean 95% Bayesian credible interval [BCI] of the log hazard ratio [LHR] -0.92 [-1.88, -0.01]). The CDA group also had statistically fewer secondary surgical procedures at the index levels (4.7%) than the ACDF group (17.6%) (LHR [95% BCI] -1.39 [-2.15, -0.61]) as well as at adjacent levels (9.0% vs 17.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The Prestige LP Cervical Disc, implanted at two adjacent levels, maintains improved clinical outcomes and segmental motion 10 years after surgery and is a safe and effective alternative to fusion.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT00637156 (clinicaltrials.gov).
目的:作者评估了颈椎间盘置换术(CDA)与颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)相比,治疗相邻两个节段退行性颈椎疾病的10年临床安全性和有效性。 方法:进行了一项前瞻性、随机、对照、多中心且经美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)批准的临床试验,比较了基于低调钛陶瓷复合材料的Prestige LP颈椎间盘(n = 209)两个节段与ACDF(n = 188)。来自一项批准后研究的10年随访数据可用于148例CDA患者和118例ACDF患者,并在此报告。术前、术中以及术后长达10年的定期随访时均完成了临床和影像学评估。主要终点是总体成功率,这是一个综合变量,包括关键的安全性和有效性考量因素。CDA的10年随访率为86.0%,ACDF为84.9%。 结果:从2年到10年,CDA在总体成功率方面显示出优于ACDF的统计学差异,10年时的成功率分别为80.4%和62.2%(优势后验概率[PPS]=99.9%)。颈部残疾指数(NDI)成功率也更高,10年时分别为88.4%和76.5%(PPS = 99.5%),神经功能成功率也是如此(92.6%对86.1%;PPS = 95.6%)。与ACDF相比,CDA术后NDI和颈部疼痛评分相对于术前结果的改善在统计学上始终更显著。在长达10年的随访期内,CDA的所有其他研究有效性指标与ACDF相比至少不劣,包括椎间盘高度。CDA组治疗节段的平均活动角度范围维持了长达10年。上下节段IV级异位骨化(HO)的发生率分别为8.2%和10.3%。重度HO(III级或IV级)的发生率从7年时的42.4%到10年时的39.0%没有显著增加。CDA组严重(3 - 4级)植入物相关或植入物/手术操作相关不良事件较少(3.8%对8.1%;对数风险比[LHR]的后验均值95%贝叶斯可信区间[BCI] -0.92 [-1.88, -0.01])。CDA组在索引节段进行二次手术的比例(4.7%)在统计学上也低于ACDF组(17.6%)(LHR [95% BCI] -1.39 [-2.15, -0.61]),在相邻节段也是如此(9.0%对17.9%)。 结论:在相邻两个节段植入的Prestige LP颈椎间盘在术后10年维持了改善的临床结果和节段活动度,是融合术的一种安全有效的替代方法。临床试验注册号:NCT00637156(clinicaltrials.gov)。
J Neurosurg Spine. 2019-5-10
J Neurosurg Spine. 2017-5
Int J Spine Surg. 2025-4-7
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024-10-23
Int J Spine Surg. 2024-11-8
Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2024-3-15
JOR Spine. 2023-10-6