Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Answer to the Letter to the Editor of Jianqiang Ni et al. concerning “ALIF and total disc replacement versus 2-level circumferential fusion with TLIF: a prospective, randomized, clinical and radiological trial” by Hoff EK, Strube P, Pumberger M, et al. (2015) Eur Spine J. doi:10.1007/s00586-015-3852-y

  • Authors Reply
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

References

  1. Cohen SP, Larkin TM, Barna SA, Palmer WE, Hecht AC, Stojanovic MP (2005) Lumbar discography: a comprehensive review of outcome studies, diagnostic accuracy, and principles. Reg Anesth Pain Med 30:163–183

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Boswell MV, Trescot AM, Datta S, Schultz DM, Hansen HC, Abdi S, Sehgal N, Shah RV, Singh V, Benyamin RM, Patel VB, Buenaventura RM, Colson JD, Cordner HJ, Epter RS, Jasper JF, Dunbar EE, Atluri SL, Bowman RC, Deer TR, Swicegood JR, Staats PS, Smith HS, Burton AW, Kloth DS, Giordano J, Manchikanti L (2007) Interventional techniques: evidence-based practice guidelines in the management of chronic spinal pain. Pain Physician 10:7–111

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Carragee EJ, Don AS, Hurwitz EL, Cuellar JM, Carrino J, Herzog R (2009) 2009 ISSLS prize winner: does discography cause accelerated progression of degeneration changes in the lumbar disc: a ten-year matched cohort study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:2338–2345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ohtori S, Kinoshita T, Yamashita M, Inoue G, Yamauchi K, Koshi T, Suzuki M, Orita S, Eguchi Y, Nakamura S, Yamagata M, Takaso M, Ochiai N, Kishida S, Aoki Y, Takahashi K (2009) Results of surgery for discogenic low back pain: a randomized study using discography versus discoblock for diagnosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:1345–1348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Alamin TF, Kim MJ, Agarwal V (2011) Provocative lumbar discography versus functional anesthetic discography: a comparison of the results of two different diagnostic techniques in 52 patients with chronic low back pain. Spine J 11:756–765

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Putzier M, Streitparth F, Hartwig T, Perka CF, Hoff EK, Strube P (2013) Can discoblock replace discography for identifying painful degenerated discs? Eur J Radiol 82:1463–1470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hoff EK, Strube P, Pumberger M, Zahn RK, Putzier M (2015) ALIF and total disc replacement versus 2-level circumferential fusion with TLIF: a prospective, randomized, clinical and radiological trial. Eur Spine J. doi:10.1007/s00586-015-3852-y

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Santos ER, Goss DG, Morcom RK, Fraser RD (2003) Radiologic assessment of interbody fusion using carbon fiber cages. Spine 28:997–1001

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Brodsky AE, Kovalsky ES, Khalil MA (1991) Correlation of radiologic assessment of lumbar spine fusions with surgical exploration. Spine 16:S261–S265

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dawson EG, Clader TJ, Bassett LW (1985) A comparison of different methods used to diagnose pseudarthrosis following posterior spinal fusion for scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67:1153–1159

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. McAfee PC, Boden SD, Brantigan JW, Fraser RD, Kuslich SD, Oxland TR, Panjabi MM, Ray CD, Zdeblick TA (2001) Symposium: a critical discrepancy-a criteria of successful arthrodesis following interbody spinal fusions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:320–334

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ray CD (1997) Threaded titanium cages for lumbar interbody fusions. Spine 22:667–679; discussion 679–680

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hutter CG (1983) Posterior intervertebral body fusion. A 25-year study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 179:86–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Simmons JW (1985) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with posterior elements as chip grafts. Clin Orthop Relat Res 193:85–89

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Zigler J, Garcia R (2015) ISASS policy statement—lumbar artificial disc. Int J Spine Surg 9:7

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lemaire JP, Carrier H, el Sariali H, Skalli W, Lavaste F (2005) Clinical and radiological outcomes with the Charite artificial disc: a 10-year minimum follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 18:353–359

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nie H, Chen G, Wang X, Zeng J (2015) Comparison of total disc replacement with lumbar fusion: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 25:60–67

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang JC, Arnold PM, Hermsmeyer JT, Norvell DC (2012) Do lumbar motion preserving devices reduce the risk of adjacent segment pathology compared with fusion surgery? A systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:S133–S143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Harrop JS, Youssef JA, Maltenfort M, Vorwald P, Jabbour P, Bono CM, Goldfarb N, Vaccaro AR, Hilibrand AS (2008) Lumbar adjacent segment degeneration and disease after arthrodesis and total disc arthroplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33:1701–1707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Siepe CJ, Mayer HM, Heinz-Leisenheimer M, Korge A (2007) Total lumbar disc replacement: different results for different levels. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:782–790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Strube P, Hoff EK, Perka CF, Gross C, Putzier M (2013) Influence of the type of the sagittal profile on clinical results of lumbar total disc replacement after a mean follow-up of 39 months. J Spinal Disord Tech. doi:10.1097/BSD.0b013e31827f434e

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Strube P, Hoff EK, Schmidt H, Dreischarf M, Rohlmann A, Putzier M (2013) Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. Part 2: distraction and posterior translation lead to clinical failure after a mean follow-up of 5 years. Eur Spine J 22:2279–2287

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rohlmann A, Lauterborn S, Dreischarf M, Schmidt H, Putzier M, Strube P, Zander T (2013) Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. Part 1: misalignment of the vertebrae adjacent to a total disc replacement affects the facet joint and facet capsule forces in a probabilistic finite element analysis. Eur Spine J 22:2271–2278

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Orthopädie, Centrum für Muskuloskeletale Chirurgie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany

    Michael Putzier

  2. Klinik für Orthopädie, Campus Waldkrankenhaus “Rudolf Elle” gGmbH, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Klosterlausnitzer Str. 81, Eisenberg, 07607, Germany

    Patrick Strube

Authors
  1. Michael Putzier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrick Strube
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Putzier.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Putzier, M., Strube, P. Answer to the Letter to the Editor of Jianqiang Ni et al. concerning “ALIF and total disc replacement versus 2-level circumferential fusion with TLIF: a prospective, randomized, clinical and radiological trial” by Hoff EK, Strube P, Pumberger M, et al. (2015) Eur Spine J. doi:10.1007/s00586-015-3852-y. Eur Spine J 24, 2347–2349 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3972-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3972-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation