• J Spinal Disord Tech · May 2014

    The effect of a mismatched center of rotation on the clinical outcomes and flexion-extension range of motion: lumbar total disk replacement using mobidisc at a 5.5-year follow-up.

    • Choon Sung Lee, Dong-Ho Lee, Chang Ju Hwang, Hyoungmin Kim, and Hyounmin Noh.
    • *Scoliosis Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine †Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
    • J Spinal Disord Tech. 2014 May 1;27(3):148-53.

    Study DesignRetrospective clinical and radiographic assessment of 21 levels of 18 consecutive patients treated using total lumbar disk replacement (TDR) for degenerative disk disease.ObjectivesTo report clinical and radiographic outcomes after TDR using the Mobidisc prosthesis. In addition, to determine whether there is a correlation between clinical and radiologic outcomes and prosthesis positioning.Summary Of Background DataTDR for lumbar degenerative disk disease is reported to provide good clinical and radiographic outcomes. However, TDR can alter the kinematics of the facet joint during flexion and extension. If prosthesis positioning is poor, the facet joint loading is increased upto 2.5-fold. No study has examined whether differences between the prosthesis center of rotation (COR) and the individual's COR have an effect on the clinical or radiographic outcomes after TDR.MethodsA retrospective study of 21 levels from 18 consecutive degenerative disk disease patients who underwent lumbar TDR. The Mobidisc prosthesis was used in all cases. Clinical parameters measured were lower back and leg pain [both assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)]. These parameters were measured preoperatively and at the last follow-up. Radiographic assessment involved examining standard lateral flexion/extension views taken at the preoperative, postoperative 6-month, and the last follow-up assessments to determine disk space height (DSH) and range of motion (ROM). Patient satisfaction (subjective outcome) was determined by telephone questioning. For analysis, TDR cases were categorized into 3 groups on the basis of the size of the "COR index," which represented the difference between an individual's inherent COR and the inherent prosthesis COR. Group 1, COR index <5 mm, consisted of 13 levels; group 2, COR index >5 mm, and <10 mm, consisted of 5 levels; and group 3, COR index >10 mm, consisted of 3 levels.ResultsOverall, 77.8% of patients stated that they were highly satisfied with their surgical outcome. Low back pain visual analogue scale scores decreased from 7.61±2.17 (mean±SD) preoperatively to 2.33±2.679 at the last follow-up (P<0.001). The function increased postoperatively (ODI: 25.89±7.77 preoperative vs. 5.89±7.21 at last follow-up; P<0.001). The difference between preoperative and the last follow-up ODI was greater in group 1 than in groups 2 and 3 (P=0.034). Radiographic findings showed that TDR resulted in improved disk space height and segmental ROM (P<0.05). Analysis of the 3 groups showed that ROM preservation decreased as the COR index increased.ConclusionsThe present study found that lumbar TDR using the Mobidisc prosthesis resulted in good clinical and radiologic outcomes and good patient satisfaction. Furthermore, we found that patient satisfaction, function, and ROM preservation correlated with correct COR positioning of the prosthesis.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.