UpToDate: Cervical total disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

Cervical total disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

Findlay et al., from London and Edinburgh, researched for cervical total disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Databases including Medline, Embase, and Scopus were searched. Inclusion criteria involved prospective randomized control trials (RCTs) reporting the surgical treatment of patients with symptomatic degenerative cervical disc disease. Two independent investigators extracted the data. The strength of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. The primary outcome measures were overall and neurological success, and these were included in the meta-analysis. Standardized patient-reported outcomes, including the incidence of further surgery and adjacent segment disease, were summarized and discussed.

A total of 22 papers published from 14 randomized control trials (RCTs) were included, representing 3160 patients with follow-up of up to ten years. Meta-analysis indicated that TDR is superior to ACDF at two years and between four and seven years. In the short-term, patients who underwent TDR had better patient-reported outcomes than those who underwent ACDF, but at two years this was typically not significant. Results between four and seven years showed significant differences in Neck Disability Index (NDI), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component scores, dysphagia, and satisfaction, all favouring TDR. Most trials found significantly less adjacent segment disease after TDR at both two years (short-term) and between four and seven years (medium- to long-term).

TDR is as effective as ACDF and superior for some outcomes. Disc replacement reduces the risk of adjacent segment disease. Continued uncertainty remains about degeneration of the prosthesis. Long-term surveillance of patients who undergo TDR may allow its routine use 1).


Cervical total disc replacement (TDR) has been shown in a number of prospective clinical studies to be a viable treatment alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease. In addition to preserving motion, evidence suggests that cervical TDR may result in a lower incidence of subsequent surgical intervention than treatment with fusion.

One reason for this trend is the observation that in clinical studies, patients with a history of cervical arthrodesis seem to have a higher incidence of adjacent segment degeneration 2) 3) 4).

Furthermore, in biomechanical investigations, most authors have reported an increase in the segmental range of motion (ROM) and the intradiscal pressure (IDP) in the levels proximal and distal to a simulated mono- or bisegmental arthrodesis 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14).

While anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been the standard of care for 2-level disease, a randomized clinical trial (RCT) suggested similar outcomes.

There are also critical debates regarding the long-term effects of heterotopic ossification (HO) and the prevalence of adjacent-level degeneration.

1)

Findlay C, Ayis S, Demetriades AK. Total disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Bone Joint J. 2018 Aug;100-B(8):991-1001. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B8.BJJ-2018-0120.R1. PubMed PMID: 30062947.
2)

Goffin J, Geusens E, Vantomme N, Quintens E, Waerzeggers Y, Depreitere B, et al. Long-term follow-up after interbody fusion of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2004;17:79–85. doi: 10.1097/00024720-200404000-00001.
3)

Gore DR, Sepic SB. Anterior discectomy and fusion for painful cervical disc disease: a report of 50 patients with an average follow-up of 21 years. Spine. 1998;23:2047–2051. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199810010-00002.
4)

Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA, Jones PK, Bohlman H. Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg. 1999;81-A:519–528.
5)

Chang U-K, Kim DH, Lee MC, Willenberg R, Kim S-H, Lim J. Changes in adjacent-level disc pressure and facet joint force after cervical arthroplasty compared with cervical discectomy and fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;7:33–39. doi: 10.3171/SPI-07/07/033.
6)

Chang U-K, Kim DH, Lee MC, Willenberg R, Kim S-H, Lim J. Range of motion change after cervical arthroplasty with ProDisc-C and Prestige artificial discs compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;7:40–46. doi: 10.3171/SPI-07/07/040.
7)

DiAngelo DJ, Foley KT, Morrow BR, Schwab JS, Song J, German JW, et al. In vitro biomechanics of cervical disc arthroplasty with the ProDisc-C total disc implant. Neurosurg Focus. 2004;17(E7):44–54. doi: 10.3171/foc.2004.17.3.7.
8)

DiAngelo DJ, Robertson JT, Metcalf NH, McVay BJ, Davis RC. Biomechanical testing of an artificial cervical joint and an anterior plate. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003;16:314–323. doi: 10.1097/00024720-200308000-00002.
9)

Dmitriev AE, Cunningham BW, Hu N, Sell G, Vigna F, McAfee PC. Adjacent level intradiscal pressure and segmental kinematics following a cervical total disc arthroplasty. An in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine. 2005;30:1165–1172. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000162441.23824.95.
10)

Eck JC, Humphreys SC, Lim T-H, Jeong ST, Kim JG, Hodges SD, et al. Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion. Spine. 2002;27:2431–2434. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200211150-00003.
11)

Fuller DA, Kirkpatrick JS, Emery SE. A kinematic study of the cervical spine before and after segmental arthrodesis. Spine. 1998;23:1649–1656. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199808010-00006.
12)

Park D-H, Ramakrishnan P, Cho T-H, Lorenz E, Eck JC, Humphreys SC, et al. Effect of lower two-level anterior cervical fusion on the superior adjacent level. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;7:336–340. doi: 10.3171/SPI-07/09/336.
13)

Pospiech J, Stolke D, Wilke HJ, Claes LE. Intradiscal pressure recordings in the cervical spine. Neurosurgery. 1999;44:379–384. doi: 10.1097/00006123-199902000-00078.
14)

Ragab AA, Escarcega AJ, Zdeblick TA. A quantitative analysis of strain at adjacent segments after segmental immobilization of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2006;19:407–410. doi: 10.1097/00024720-200608000-00006.

UpToDate: Anterior temporal lobectomy complications

Anterior temporal lobectomy complications

Anterior temporal lobectomy is often complicated by quadrantanopia. In some cases this can be severe enough to prohibit driving, even if a patient is free of seizures. These deficits are caused by damage to Meyers loop of the optic radiation, which shows considerable heterogeneity in its anterior extent. This structure cannot be distinguished using clinical magnetic resonance imaging sequences.

Optic radiation tractography by DTI could be a useful method to assess an individual patient’s risk of postoperative visual deficit 1)2).

van Lanen et al., developed a score method for the assessment of postoperative visual field defects after temporal lobe epilepsy surgery and assessed its feasibility for clinical use. A significant correlation between VFD and resection size for right-sided ATL was confirmed 3).

Cranial nerve (CN) deficits following anterior temporal lobectomy (ATL) are an uncommon but well-recognized complication. The usual CNs implicated in post-ATL complications include the oculomotor nervetrochlear nerve, and facial nerves.

Injury to the trigeminal nerve leading to neuropathic pain are described in 2 cases following temporal lobe resections for pharmacoresistant epilepsy. The possible pathophysiological mechanisms are discussed and the microsurgical anatomy of surgically relevant structures is reviewed.4).

Complications

Dickerson et al., from the Department of Neurosurgery, University of Mississippi Medical Center, JacksonUSA report the third known case and first of diffuse vasospasm. A 48-year-old woman underwent a transcortical anterior left temporal lobectomy. Eleven days later, she had new-onset expressive aphasia with narrowing of the anterior, middle, and posterior cerebral arteries, and increased velocities via transcranial Doppler. She was treated with fluids, nimodipine, and permissive hypertension. At 6 months, her speech was near baseline. Cerebral vasospasm may represent a rare cause of morbidity after anterior temporal lobectomy; a literature review on the subject is presented 5).

References

1)

Borius PY, Roux FE, Valton L, Sol JC, Lotterie JA, Berry I. Can DTI fiber tracking of the optic radiations predict visual deficit after surgery? Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2014 Jul;122:87-91. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2014.04.017. Epub 2014 May 5. PubMed PMID: 24908224.
2)

James JS, Radhakrishnan A, Thomas B, Madhusoodanan M, Kesavadas C, Abraham M, Menon R, Rathore C, Vilanilam G. Diffusion tensor imaging tractography of Meyer’s loop in planning resective surgery for drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsy Res. 2015 Feb;110:95-104. doi: 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2014.11.020. Epub 2014 Nov 27. PubMed PMID: 25616461.
3)

van Lanen RHGJ, Hoeberigs MC, Bauer NJC, Haeren RHL, Hoogland G, Colon A, Piersma C, Dings JTA, Schijns OEMG. Visual field deficits after epilepsy surgery: a new quantitative scoring method. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2018 Jul;160(7):1325-1336. doi: 10.1007/s00701-018-3525-9. Epub 2018 Apr 5. PubMed PMID: 29623432; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5995984.
4)

Gill I, Parrent AG, Steven DA. Trigeminal neuropathic pain as a complication of anterior temporal lobectomy: report of 2 cases. J Neurosurg. 2016 Apr;124(4):962-5. doi: 10.3171/2015.5.JNS15123. Epub 2015 Oct 30. PubMed PMID: 26517768.
5)

Dickerson JC, Hidalgo JA, Smalley ZS, Shiflett JM. Diffuse vasospasm after transcortical temporal lobectomy for intractable epilepsy. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2018 Jul 10. doi: 10.1007/s00701-018-3606-9. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 29987392.
WhatsApp WhatsApp us