Abstract
Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is still considered the gold standard for surgical management of cervical spondylosis. The discovery of the impact of fusion on other functional spinal units in the form of adjacent segment disease has led to the development of motion-sparing techniques in cervical spine surgery, such as cervical arthroplasty. A substantial number of different cervical artificial disc implants have been approved for clinical use, some with long-term follow-up data demonstrating the safety and efficacy of the implants in maintaining motion of the index level. However, a significant number of prostheses failed to retain the desired mobility, mostly due to heterotopic ossification and unintentional fusion. Choosing the appropriate implant design, along with meticulous surgical technique, is the most important prerequisite for good surgical results and longevity of implant integrity and function. In this chapter we discuss the evolution of key characteristics of implant design crucial for successful surgery, as well as surgical tips and techniques related to cervical arthroplasty.
References
Anderson PA, Sasso RC, Rouleau JP et al (2004) The Bryan cervical disc: wear properties and early clinical results. Spine J 4:303S–309S
Cinotti G, David T, Postacchini F (1996) Results of disc prosthesis after a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. Spine 21:995–1000
Cloward RB (1958) The anterior approach for removal of ruptured cervical disks. J Neurosurg 15:602–617
Cummins BH, Robertson JT, Gill SS (1998) Surgical experience with an implanted artificial cervical joint. J Neurosurg 88:881–884
Fernström U (1966) Arthroplasty with intercorporal endoprothesis in herniated disc and in painful disc. Acta Chir Scand Suppl 357:154–159
Goffin J, Casey A, Kehr P et al (2002) Preliminary clinical experience with the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis. Neurosurgery 51:840–845
Goffin J, Van Calenbergh F, van Loon J et al (2003) Intermediate follow-up after treatment of degenerative disc disease with the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis: single-level and bi-level. Spine 28:2673–2678
Guyer RD, Ohnmeiss DD (2003) Intervertebral disc prostheses. Spine 28(Suppl 15):S15–S23
Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA et al (1999) Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:519–528
Lemaire JP, Skalli W, Lavaste F et al (1997) Intervertebral disc prosthesis. Results and prospects for the year 2000. Clin Orthop Relat Res 337:64–76
McKee GK, Watson-Farrar J (1966) Replacement of arthritic hips by the McKee-Farrar prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 48:245–259
Robinson RA, Smith GW (1955) Anterolateral cervical disc removal and interbody fusion for cervical disc syndrome. Bull Johns Hopkins Hosp 96:223–224
Smith GW, Robinson RA (1958) The treatment of certain cervical spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 40:607–624
Wiles P (1958) The surgery of the osteoarthritic hip. Br J Surg 45:488–497
Zeegers WS, Bohnen LM, Laaper M et al (1999) Artificial disc re- placement with the modular type SB Charite III: 2-year results in 50 prospectively studied patients. Eur Spine J 8:210–217
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Vukic, M., Marasanov, S.M. (2021). Cervical Total Disc Replacement: Technique – Pitfalls and Pearls. In: Cheng, B.C. (eds) Handbook of Spine Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44424-6_75
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44424-6_75
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-44423-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-44424-6
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesReference Module Biomedical and Life Sciences