Cargando…

Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty: A Review of Current Implant Design and Outcomes

While spinal disc pathology has traditionally been treated using fusion-based procedures, recent interest in motion-preserving disc arthroplasties has grown. Traditional spinal fusion is associated with loss of motion, alteration of native spine kinematics, and increased risks of adjacent segment di...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wellington, Ian J., Kia, Cameron, Coskun, Ergin, Torre, Barrett B., Antonacci, Christopher L., Mancini, Michael R., Connors, John P., Esmende, Sean M., Makanji, Heeren S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9137579/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35621505
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9050227
_version_ 1784714411976425472
author Wellington, Ian J.
Kia, Cameron
Coskun, Ergin
Torre, Barrett B.
Antonacci, Christopher L.
Mancini, Michael R.
Connors, John P.
Esmende, Sean M.
Makanji, Heeren S.
author_facet Wellington, Ian J.
Kia, Cameron
Coskun, Ergin
Torre, Barrett B.
Antonacci, Christopher L.
Mancini, Michael R.
Connors, John P.
Esmende, Sean M.
Makanji, Heeren S.
author_sort Wellington, Ian J.
collection PubMed
description While spinal disc pathology has traditionally been treated using fusion-based procedures, recent interest in motion-preserving disc arthroplasties has grown. Traditional spinal fusion is associated with loss of motion, alteration of native spine kinematics, and increased risks of adjacent segment disease. The motion conferred by disc arthroplasty is believed to combat these complications. While the first implant designs resulted in poor patient outcomes, recent advances in implant design and technology have shown promising radiographic and clinical outcomes when compared with traditional fusion. These results have led to a rapid increase in the utilization of disc arthroplasty, with rates of cervical arthroplasty nearly tripling over the course of 7 years. The purpose of this review was to discuss the evolution of implant design, the current implant designs utilized, and their associated outcomes. Although disc arthroplasty shows significant promise in addressing some of the drawbacks associated with fusion, it is not without its own risks. Osteolysis, implant migration, and the development of heterotopic ossification have all been associated with disc arthroplasty. As interest in these procedures grows, so does the interest in developing improved implant designs aimed at decreasing these adverse outcomes. Though they are still relatively new, cervical and lumbar disc arthroplasty are likely to become foundational methodologies for the treatment of disc pathology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9137579
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91375792022-05-28 Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty: A Review of Current Implant Design and Outcomes Wellington, Ian J. Kia, Cameron Coskun, Ergin Torre, Barrett B. Antonacci, Christopher L. Mancini, Michael R. Connors, John P. Esmende, Sean M. Makanji, Heeren S. Bioengineering (Basel) Review While spinal disc pathology has traditionally been treated using fusion-based procedures, recent interest in motion-preserving disc arthroplasties has grown. Traditional spinal fusion is associated with loss of motion, alteration of native spine kinematics, and increased risks of adjacent segment disease. The motion conferred by disc arthroplasty is believed to combat these complications. While the first implant designs resulted in poor patient outcomes, recent advances in implant design and technology have shown promising radiographic and clinical outcomes when compared with traditional fusion. These results have led to a rapid increase in the utilization of disc arthroplasty, with rates of cervical arthroplasty nearly tripling over the course of 7 years. The purpose of this review was to discuss the evolution of implant design, the current implant designs utilized, and their associated outcomes. Although disc arthroplasty shows significant promise in addressing some of the drawbacks associated with fusion, it is not without its own risks. Osteolysis, implant migration, and the development of heterotopic ossification have all been associated with disc arthroplasty. As interest in these procedures grows, so does the interest in developing improved implant designs aimed at decreasing these adverse outcomes. Though they are still relatively new, cervical and lumbar disc arthroplasty are likely to become foundational methodologies for the treatment of disc pathology. MDPI 2022-05-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9137579/ /pubmed/35621505 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9050227 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Wellington, Ian J.
Kia, Cameron
Coskun, Ergin
Torre, Barrett B.
Antonacci, Christopher L.
Mancini, Michael R.
Connors, John P.
Esmende, Sean M.
Makanji, Heeren S.
Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty: A Review of Current Implant Design and Outcomes
title Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty: A Review of Current Implant Design and Outcomes
title_full Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty: A Review of Current Implant Design and Outcomes
title_fullStr Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty: A Review of Current Implant Design and Outcomes
title_full_unstemmed Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty: A Review of Current Implant Design and Outcomes
title_short Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty: A Review of Current Implant Design and Outcomes
title_sort cervical and lumbar disc arthroplasty: a review of current implant design and outcomes
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9137579/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35621505
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9050227
work_keys_str_mv AT wellingtonianj cervicalandlumbardiscarthroplastyareviewofcurrentimplantdesignandoutcomes
AT kiacameron cervicalandlumbardiscarthroplastyareviewofcurrentimplantdesignandoutcomes
AT coskunergin cervicalandlumbardiscarthroplastyareviewofcurrentimplantdesignandoutcomes
AT torrebarrettb cervicalandlumbardiscarthroplastyareviewofcurrentimplantdesignandoutcomes
AT antonaccichristopherl cervicalandlumbardiscarthroplastyareviewofcurrentimplantdesignandoutcomes
AT mancinimichaelr cervicalandlumbardiscarthroplastyareviewofcurrentimplantdesignandoutcomes
AT connorsjohnp cervicalandlumbardiscarthroplastyareviewofcurrentimplantdesignandoutcomes
AT esmendeseanm cervicalandlumbardiscarthroplastyareviewofcurrentimplantdesignandoutcomes
AT makanjiheerens cervicalandlumbardiscarthroplastyareviewofcurrentimplantdesignandoutcomes