Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Bone loss of the superior adjacent vertebral body immediately posterior to the anterior flange of Bryan cervical disc

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

No previous reports have mentioned bone loss of the superior adjacent vertebra immediately posterior to the anterior flange of Bryan cervical disc (Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN, USA), which plays a central role to prevent posterior migration of the device. The purpose of this study is to describe a new potential complication, bone loss immediately posterior to the anterior total disc replacement (TDR) flange on the superior adjacent vertebra following the Bryan cervical TDR and to discuss the possible mechanism.

Methods

The authors retrospectively reviewed 37 patients undergoing cervical TDR with the Bryan cervical disc. The clinical and radiological outcome data were collected at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months postoperatively, and at last follow-up, which ranged from 42 to 113 moths (average, 60.1 months). Clinical evaluation included the visual analog scale and neck disability index, and the radiographic evaluation included measurements of the functional spinal unit range of motion on flexion and extension and identification of radiographic changes such as bone loss.

Results

The Bryan TDR showed good mid-term clinical and radiological outcomes. Interestingly, however, bone loss was noted immediately posterior to the TDR flange on superior adjacent vertebra in 3 total patients; at 3 months (n = 2) and 6 months (n = 1). Although the bone loss was increased up to 6 months, this did not progress and no degradation of clinical and radiological outcomes occurred at last follow-up.

Conclusions

Bone loss immediately posterior to the anterior TDR flange on the superior adjacent vertebra can occur in the early postoperative period due to possibly stress shielding effect. However, it did not result in clinical changes or increased rates of graft failure at last follow-up. A long-term follow-up study is mandatory to evaluate the long-term effects of the bone loss.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Samartzis D, Shen FH, Goldberg EJ, An HS (2005) Is autograft the gold standard in achieving radiographic fusion in one-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with rigid anterior plate fixation? Spine 30:1756–1761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Carrier CS, Bono M, Lebl DR (2013) Evidence-based analysis of adjacent segment degeneration and disease after ACDF: a systematic review. Spine J 13:1370–1378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lundine KM, Davis G, Rogers M, Staples M, Quan G (2014) Prevalence of adjacent segment disc degeneration in patients with undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion based on pre-operative MRI findings. J Clin Neurosci 21:82–85

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ding C, Hong Y, Liu H, Shi R, Hu T, Li T (2012) Intermediate clinical outcome of Bryan cervical disc replacement for degenerative disk disease and its effect on adjacent segment disks. Orthopedics 35:e909–e916

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Goffin J, Casey A, Kehr P, Liebig K, Lind B, Loqroscino C, Pointillart V, Van Calenbergh F, van Loon J (2002) Preliminary clinical experience with the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis. Neurosurgery 51:840–847

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Heller JG, Sasso RC, Papadopoulos SM, Anderson PA, Fessler RG, Hacker RJ, Coric D, Cauthen JC, Riew DK (2009) Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized controlled clinical trial. Spine 34:101–107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ryu WH, Kowalczyk I, Duggal N (2013) Long-term kinematic analysis of cervical spine after single-level implantation of Bryan cervical disc prosthesis. Spine J 13(6):628–634

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Walraevens J, Demaerel P, Suetens P, Van Calenbergh F, van Loon J, Goffin J (2010) Longitudinal prospective long-term radiographic follow-up after treatment of single-level cervical disc with the Bryan cervical disc. Neurosurgery 67:679–687

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Yi S, Shin DA, Kim KN, Choi G, Shin HC, Kim KS, Yoon DH (2013) The predisposing factors for the heterotopic ossification after cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine J 13:1048–1054

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hacker FM, Babcock RM, Hacker RJ (2013) Very late complications of cervical arthroplasty. Spine 38(26):2223–2226

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Murrey D, Janssen M, Delamarter R, Goldstein J, Zigler J, Tay B, Darden B (2009) Results of the prospective, controlled multicenter food and drug administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-C total disc replacement versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of 1-level symptomatic cervical disc disease. Spine J 9:275–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Carreon LY, Bratcher KR, Das N, Nienhuis JB, Glassman SD (2014) Estimating EQ-5D values from the neck disability index and numeric rating scales for neck and arm pain. J Neurosurg Spine 21(3):394–399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zoeqa B, Karrholm J, Lind B (2000) Outcome scores in degenerative cervical disc surgery. Eur Spine J 9(2):137–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Quan GM, Vital JM, Hansen S, Poinillart V (2011) Eight-year clinical and radiological follow-up of the Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty. Spine 36(8):639–646

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Michaela G, Denise H, Liebensteiner M, Michael BM (2008) Foot print mismatch in lumbar total disc arthroplasty. Eur Spine J 17(11):1470–1475

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Malham GM, Parker RM, Ellis NJ, Chan PG, Varma D (2014) Cervical artificial disc replacement with ProDisc-C: Clinical and radiographic outcomes with long-term follow-up. J Clin Neurosci 21(6):949–953

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mummaneni PV, Burkus JK, Haid RW, Traynelis VC, Zdeblick TA (2007) Clinical and radiographic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 6(3):198–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86(2):420–428

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gstoettner M, Sekyra K, Walochnik N, Winter P, Wachter R, Bach CM (2007) Inter- and intraobserver reliability assessment of the Cobb angle: manual versus digital measurement tools. Eur Spine J 16:1587–1592

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Veruva SY, Lanman TH, Hanzlik JA, Kurtz SM, Steinbeck MJ (2014) Rare complications of osteolysis and periprosthetic tissue reactions after hybrid and non-hybrid total disc replacement. Eur Spine J. doi:10.1007/s00586-014-3535-0

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kang DG, Wagner SC, Lehman RA Jr (2014) Osteolysis in the setting of metal-on-metal cervical disc arthroplasty. Spine J 14(7):1362–1365

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tumialan LM, Gluf WM (2011) Progressive vertebral body osteolysis after disc arthroplasty. Spine 36(14):E973–E978

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Zijlstra WP, van der Veen HC, van den Akker-Scheek I, Zee MJ, Bulstra SK, van Raay JJ (2014) Acetabular bone density and metal ions after metal-on-metal versus metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty; short-term results. Hip Int 24(2):136–143

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Boyle C, Kim IY (2011) Comparison of different hip prosthesis shapes considering micro-level bone remodeling and stress-shielding criteria using three-dimensional design space topology optimization. J Biomech 44(9):1772–1778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Huiskes R, Weinans H, Van Reitbergen B (1992) The relationship between stress shielding and bone resorption around total hip stems and the effects of flexible materials. Clin Orthop 274:124–134

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Dala F, Barnoud R, Fessy MH, Besse JL (2013) Histologic study of periprosthetic osteolytic lesions after AES total ankle replacement A 22 case series. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 99(6):S285–S295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gallo J, Goodman SB, Konttinen YT, Wimmer MA, Holinka M (2013) Osteolysis around total knee arthroplasty: a review of pathogenic mechanisms. Acta Biomater 9(9):8046–8058

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Piao C, Wu D, Luo M, Ma H (2014) Stress shielding effects of two prosthetic groups after total hip joint stimulation. J Orthop Surg Res 9:71

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Au AG, James Raso V, Liggins AB, Amirfazli A (2007) Contribution of loading conditions and material properties to stress shielding near the tibial component of total knee replacements. J Biomech 40(6):1410–1416

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ang KC, Das DS, Goh JC, Low SL, Bose K (1997) Periprosthetic bone remodeling after cementless total hip replacement. A prospective comparison of two different implant designs. J Bone Joint Surg. (Br) 79:675–679

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Korea Healthcare Technology Research and Development Project, Ministry for Health and Welfare Affairs (#A121956).

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest concerning the materials or methods used in this study or the findings described in this paper. No benefits in any form have been or will be received from any commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this manuscript.

Author information

Author notes

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. Department of Neurosurgery, Ajou University, Suwon, Korea

      Sang Hyun Kim

    2. Department of Neurosurgery, Kunkuk University, Chungju, Korea

      Young Sun Chung

    3. Department of Neurosurgery, Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, AZ, USA

      Alexander E. Ropper

    4. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Seongnam, Korea

      Kyung Hoon Min

    5. Department of Orthopedics, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Seongnam, Korea

      Tae Keun Ahn

    6. Department of Neurosurgery, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, 59, Yatap-ro Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, 463-712, Korea

      Keun Soo Won & In Bo Han

    7. Department of Neurosurgery, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University, 50, Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-749, Korea

      Dong Ah Shin

    Authors
    1. Sang Hyun Kim
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    2. Young Sun Chung
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    3. Alexander E. Ropper
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    4. Kyung Hoon Min
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    5. Tae Keun Ahn
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    6. Keun Soo Won
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    7. Dong Ah Shin
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    8. In Bo Han
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding authors

    Correspondence to Dong Ah Shin or In Bo Han.

    Additional information

    S. H. Kim, Y. S. Chung and A. E. Ropper contributed equally to this work.

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this article

    Kim, S.H., Chung, Y.S., Ropper, A.E. et al. Bone loss of the superior adjacent vertebral body immediately posterior to the anterior flange of Bryan cervical disc. Eur Spine J 24, 2872–2879 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3849-6

    Download citation

    • Received:

    • Revised:

    • Accepted:

    • Published:

    • Issue Date:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3849-6

    Keywords

    Search

    Navigation