Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Lumbar total disc replacement: predictors for long-term outcome

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

Abstract

Purpose

We aimed to identify patient characteristics associated with favourable long-term outcomes after lumbar total disc replacement (TDR).

Methods

We analysed a cohort of 82 patients with degenerative disc and chronic low back pain (LBP) who were treated with TDR and originally participated in a randomised trial comparing TDR and multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Potential predictors were measured at baseline, and the outcomes assessed 8 years after they received allocated treatment. Outcome measures were dichotomised according to whether the participants achieved a clinically important functional improvement (15 points or more on the Oswestry Disability Index, ODI) (primary outcome) and whether they were employed at 8-year follow-up (secondary outcome). Associations between potential predictors and outcomes were modelled using logistic regression. For the secondary outcome, the results were also organised in a prediction matrix and expressed as probabilities.

Results

For 71 patients treated with TDR according to protocol, the follow-up time was 8 years. For a subgroup of 11 patients randomised to rehabilitation who crossed over and received TDR, the median postoperative follow-up time was 72 (range 41–88) months. Of all assessed baseline variables, only presence of Modic changes (type 1 and/or 2) was statistically significantly associated with an improvement of ≥ 15 ODI points. The probability of employment at 8-year follow-up was 1% for patients with ≥ 1 year of sick leave, comorbidity, ODI ≥ 50 and ≤ 9 years of education prior to treatment, and 87% for patients with < 1 year of sick leave, no comorbidity, ODI < 50 and higher education.

Conclusions

Patients with Modic changes prior to the TDR surgery were more likely to report a clinically important functional improvement at long-term follow-up. Comorbidity, low level of education, long-term sick leave and high ODI score at baseline were associated with unemployment at long-term follow-up.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jacobs W, Van der Gaag NA, Tuschel A, de Kleuver M, Peul W, Verbout AJ, Oner FC (2012) Total disc replacement for chronic back pain in the presence of disc degeneration. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (Online) 9:CD008326. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008326.pub2

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ding F, Jia Z, Zhao Z, Xie L, Gao X, Ma D, Liu M (2017) Total disc replacement versus fusion for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses. Eur Spine J 26:806–815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4714-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 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 

  4. David T (2007) Long-term results of one-level lumbar arthroplasty: minimum 10-year follow-up of the CHARITE artificial disc in 106 patients. Spine 32:661–666. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000257554.67505.45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Guyer RD, McAfee PC, Banco RJ, Bitan FD, Cappuccino A, Geisler FH, Hochschuler SH, Holt RT, Jenis LG, Majd ME, Regan JJ, Tromanhauser SG, Wong DC, Blumenthal SL (2009) Prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: five-year follow-up. Spine J 9:374–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2008.08.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Skold C, Tropp H, Berg S (2013) Five-year follow-up of total disc replacement compared to fusion: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2926-y

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Siepe CJ, Heider F, Wiechert K, Hitzl W, Ishak B, Mayer MH (2014) Mid- to long-term results of total lumbar disc replacement: a prospective analysis with 5- to 10-year follow-up. Spine J 14:1417–1431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.08.028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Guyer RD, Pettine K, Roh JS, Dimmig TA, Coric D, McAfee PC, Ohnmeiss DD (2016) Five-year follow-up of a prospective, randomized trial comparing two lumbar total disc replacements. Spine 41:3–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000001168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Park SJ, Lee CS, Chung SS, Lee KH, Kim WS, Lee JY (2016) Long-term outcomes following lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc-II: average 10-year follow-up at a single institute. Spine 41:971–977. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000001527

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Furunes H, Storheim K, Brox JI, Johnsen LG, Skouen JS, Franssen E, Solberg TK, Sandvik L, Hellum C (2017) Total disc replacement versus multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative discs: eight-year follow-up of a randomized controlled multicenter trial. Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.05.011

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hellum C, Johnsen LG, Gjertsen O, Berg L, Neckelmann G, Grundnes O, Rossvoll I, Skouen JS, Brox JI, Storheim K (2012) Predictors of outcome after surgery with disc prosthesis and rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative disc: 2-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 21:681–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-2145-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Gornet MF, Schranck F, Wharton ND, Beall DP, Jones E, Myers ME, Hipp JA (2014) Optimizing success with lumbar disc arthroplasty. Eur Spine J 23:2127–2135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3309-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hellum C, Johnsen LG, Storheim K, Nygaard OP, Brox JI, Rossvoll I, Ro M, Sandvik L, Grundnes O (2011) Surgery with disc prosthesis versus rehabilitation in patients with low back pain and degenerative disc: two year follow-up of randomised study. BMJ 342:d2786. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d2786

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB (2000) The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 25:2940–2952

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Statistics Norway (1984) Standard classifications of socioeconomic status. Statistics Norway, Oslo

    Google Scholar 

  16. Statistics Norway (1998) Standard classification of occupations. Statistics Norway, Oslo

    Google Scholar 

  17. Derogatis LR, Lipman RS, Rickels K, Uhlenhuth EH, Covi L (1974) The Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL): a self-report symptom inventory. Behav Sci 19:1–15

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I, Somerville D, Main CJ (1993) A Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability. Pain 52:157–168

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30:473–483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Uden A, Astrom M, Bergenudd H (1988) Pain drawings in chronic back pain. Spine 13:389–392

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Legaye J, Duval-Beaupere G, Hecquet J, Marty C (1998) Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curves. Eur Spine J 7:99–103

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Modic MT, Steinberg PM, Ross JS, Masaryk TJ, Carter JR (1988) Degenerative disk disease: assessment of changes in vertebral body marrow with MR imaging. Radiology 166:193–199

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Masharawi Y, Kjaer P, Bendix T, Manniche C, Wedderkopp N, Sorensen JS, Peled N, Jensen TS (2008) The reproducibility of quantitative measurements in lumbar magnetic resonance imaging of children from the general population. Spine 33:2094–2100. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31817f19f7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Luoma K, Riihimaki H, Luukkonen R, Raininko R, Viikari-Juntura E, Lamminen A (2000) Low back pain in relation to lumbar disc degeneration. Spine 25:487–492

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fujiwara A, Tamai K, Yamato M, An HS, Yoshida H, Saotome K, Kurihashi A (1999) The relationship between facet joint osteoarthritis and disc degeneration of the lumbar spine: an MRI study. Eur Spine J 8:396–401

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Aprill C, Bogduk N (1992) High-intensity zone: a diagnostic sign of painful lumbar disc on magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Radiol 65:361–369. https://doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-65-773-361

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Berg L, Neckelmann G, Gjertsen O, Hellum C, Johnsen LG, Eide GE, Espeland A (2012) Reliability of MRI findings in candidates for lumbar disc prosthesis. Neuroradiology 54:699–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-011-0963-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Geisser S (1993) Predictive inference. Chapman and Hall, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Laustsen AF, Bech-Azeddine R (2016) Do Modic changes have an impact on clinical outcome in lumbar spine surgery? A systematic literature review. Eur Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4609-y

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cougot B, Petit A, Paget C, Roedlich C, Fleury-Bahi G, Fouquet M, Menu P, Dubois C, Geraut C, Roquelaure Y, Tripodi D (2015) Chronic low back pain among French healthcare workers and prognostic factors of return to work (RTW): a non-randomized controlled trial. J Occup Med Toxicol 10:40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-015-0082-5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Grovle L, Haugen AJ, Keller A, Natvig B, Brox JI, Grotle M (2010) The bothersomeness of sciatica: patients’ self-report of paresthesia, weakness and leg pain. Eur Spine J 19:263–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1042-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. McGirt MJ, Sivaganesan A, Asher AL, Devin CJ (2015) Prediction model for outcome after low-back surgery: individualized likelihood of complication, hospital readmission, return to work, and 12-month improvement in functional disability. Neurosurg Focus 39:E13. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.8.focus15338

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Nordeman L, Gunnarsson R, Mannerkorpi K (2014) Prognostic factors for work ability in women with chronic low back pain consulting primary health care: a 2-year prospective longitudinal cohort study. Clin J Pain 30:391–398. https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0b013e3182a0dd06

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Johnsen LG, Hellum C, Nygaard OP, Storheim K, Brox JI, Rossvoll I, Leivseth G, Grotle M (2013) Comparison of the SF6D, the EQ5D, and the Oswestry disability index in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative disc disease. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 14:148. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-148

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. van Hooff ML, Mannion AF, Staub LP, Ostelo RW, Fairbank JC (2016) Determination of the Oswestry Disability Index score equivalent to a “satisfactory symptom state” in patients undergoing surgery for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine—a Spine Tango registry-based study. Spine J 16:1221–1230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2016.06.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Peng B, Fu X, Pang X, Li D, Liu W, Gao C, Yang H (2012) Prospective clinical study on natural history of discogenic low back pain at 4 years of follow-up. Pain Phys 15:525–532

    Google Scholar 

  37. Geisler FH, Guyer RD, Blumenthal SL, McAfee PC, Cappuccino A, Bitan F, Regan JJ (2008) Patient selection for lumbar arthroplasty and arthrodesis: the effect of revision surgery in a controlled, multicenter, randomized study. J Neurosurg Spine 8:13–16. https://doi.org/10.3171/spi-08/01/013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Maren Hjelle Guddal: collecting and punching data. Marianne Bakke Johnsen: collecting and punching data. Eira Kathleen Ebbs: language help.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Innlandet Hospital Gjøvik, Kyrre Grepps Gate 11, 2819, Gjøvik, Norway

    Håvard Furunes

  2. University of Oslo, Blindern, Postbox 1072, 0316, Oslo, Norway

    Håvard Furunes, Jens Ivar Brox & Kjersti Storheim

  3. Oslo University Hospital Ullevål, FORMI, Building 37B, Nydalen, Postbox 4950, 0424, Oslo, Norway

    Håvard Furunes, Milada Cvancarova Småstuen & Kjersti Storheim

  4. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Nydalen, Postbox 4950, 0424, Oslo, Norway

    Christian Hellum

  5. Department for Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Oslo University Hospital, Nydalen, Postbox 4950, 0424, Oslo, Norway

    Jens Ivar Brox

  6. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Olav’s University Hospital, Prinsesse Kristinas Gate 3, 7030, Trondheim, Norway

    Ivar Rossvoll

  7. Department of Neuromedicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Høgskoleringen 1, 7491, Trondheim, Norway

    Ivar Rossvoll

  8. Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Jonas Liesvei 65, 5021, Bergen, Norway

    Ansgar Espeland

  9. Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, PB 7804, 5020, Bergen, Norway

    Ansgar Espeland

  10. Department of Radiology, Nordland Hospital, Postbox 1480, 8092, Bodø, Norway

    Linda Berg

  11. Institute of Clinical Medicine, UiT, The Arctic University of Norway, Langnes, Postbox 6050, 9037, Tromsø, Norway

    Linda Berg

  12. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Nydalen, Postbox 4950, 0424, Oslo, Norway

    Helga Maria Brøgger

  13. Department of Health Science, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, St. Olavs Plass, PO Box 4, 0130, Oslo, Norway

    Milada Cvancarova Småstuen

Authors
  1. Håvard Furunes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Hellum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jens Ivar Brox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ivar Rossvoll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ansgar Espeland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Linda Berg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Helga Maria Brøgger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Milada Cvancarova Småstuen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Kjersti Storheim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Håvard Furunes.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None of the authors has any potential conflict of interest.

Funding

The study was funded by Oslo University Hospital, South Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority (Grant no. 2007082) and EXTRA funds from the Norwegian Foundation for Health and Rehabilitation through the Norwegian Back Pain Association ((Grant no. 2012/2/0236). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Furunes, H., Hellum, C., Brox, J.I. et al. Lumbar total disc replacement: predictors for long-term outcome. Eur Spine J 27, 709–718 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5375-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5375-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation