Cargando…
Discrepancy between cervical disc prostheses and anatomical cervical dimensions
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess appropriateness of the sizes of available cervical disc prostheses based on tomographic measurement of human cervical vertebrae. METHODS: The anatomic dimensions of the C3–C7 segments were measured on 50 patients (age range 26–47 years) with computerize...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6197307/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27776930 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aott.2016.03.003 |
_version_ | 1783364738507341824 |
---|---|
author | Karaca, Sinan Akpolat, Ahmet Onur Oztermeli, Ahmet Erdem, Mehmet Nuri Aydogan, Mehmet |
author_facet | Karaca, Sinan Akpolat, Ahmet Onur Oztermeli, Ahmet Erdem, Mehmet Nuri Aydogan, Mehmet |
author_sort | Karaca, Sinan |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess appropriateness of the sizes of available cervical disc prostheses based on tomographic measurement of human cervical vertebrae. METHODS: The anatomic dimensions of the C3–C7 segments were measured on 50 patients (age range 26–47 years) with computerized tomography scan and compared with the sizes of the popular cervical total disc prostheses (CTDP) at the market [Bryan (Medtronic), Prodisc-C (Synthes), Prestige LP (Medtronic), Discover (DePuy)]. The mediolateral and anteriorposterior diameters of the upper and lower endplates were measured with a digital measuring system. RESULTS: Overall, 43.7% of the largest implant footprints were smaller in the anterior-posterior diameter and 42.6% in the mediolateral diameter were smaller than cervical endplate measurements. Discrepancy of the level C5/C6 and C6/C7 was calculated as 56.2% at the anteroposterior diameter and 43.8% at the center of mediolateral diameter. CONCLUSION: Large disparity has been found between the sizes of devices and cervical anatomic data. Companies that produce CTDP should take care of the anatomical dimensions and generate different sizes of CTDP. Spine surgeon should be familiar with the size mismatch in CTDP that may affect the clinical and radiological outcome of the surgery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6197307 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61973072018-10-24 Discrepancy between cervical disc prostheses and anatomical cervical dimensions Karaca, Sinan Akpolat, Ahmet Onur Oztermeli, Ahmet Erdem, Mehmet Nuri Aydogan, Mehmet Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc Original Article OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess appropriateness of the sizes of available cervical disc prostheses based on tomographic measurement of human cervical vertebrae. METHODS: The anatomic dimensions of the C3–C7 segments were measured on 50 patients (age range 26–47 years) with computerized tomography scan and compared with the sizes of the popular cervical total disc prostheses (CTDP) at the market [Bryan (Medtronic), Prodisc-C (Synthes), Prestige LP (Medtronic), Discover (DePuy)]. The mediolateral and anteriorposterior diameters of the upper and lower endplates were measured with a digital measuring system. RESULTS: Overall, 43.7% of the largest implant footprints were smaller in the anterior-posterior diameter and 42.6% in the mediolateral diameter were smaller than cervical endplate measurements. Discrepancy of the level C5/C6 and C6/C7 was calculated as 56.2% at the anteroposterior diameter and 43.8% at the center of mediolateral diameter. CONCLUSION: Large disparity has been found between the sizes of devices and cervical anatomic data. Companies that produce CTDP should take care of the anatomical dimensions and generate different sizes of CTDP. Spine surgeon should be familiar with the size mismatch in CTDP that may affect the clinical and radiological outcome of the surgery. Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology 2016-10 2016-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6197307/ /pubmed/27776930 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aott.2016.03.003 Text en © 2016 Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Karaca, Sinan Akpolat, Ahmet Onur Oztermeli, Ahmet Erdem, Mehmet Nuri Aydogan, Mehmet Discrepancy between cervical disc prostheses and anatomical cervical dimensions |
title | Discrepancy between cervical disc prostheses and anatomical cervical dimensions |
title_full | Discrepancy between cervical disc prostheses and anatomical cervical dimensions |
title_fullStr | Discrepancy between cervical disc prostheses and anatomical cervical dimensions |
title_full_unstemmed | Discrepancy between cervical disc prostheses and anatomical cervical dimensions |
title_short | Discrepancy between cervical disc prostheses and anatomical cervical dimensions |
title_sort | discrepancy between cervical disc prostheses and anatomical cervical dimensions |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6197307/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27776930 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aott.2016.03.003 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT karacasinan discrepancybetweencervicaldiscprosthesesandanatomicalcervicaldimensions AT akpolatahmetonur discrepancybetweencervicaldiscprosthesesandanatomicalcervicaldimensions AT oztermeliahmet discrepancybetweencervicaldiscprosthesesandanatomicalcervicaldimensions AT erdemmehmetnuri discrepancybetweencervicaldiscprosthesesandanatomicalcervicaldimensions AT aydoganmehmet discrepancybetweencervicaldiscprosthesesandanatomicalcervicaldimensions |