Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Adjacent-Level Disease: Fact and Fiction

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Spine Technology

  • 199 Accesses

Abstract

The topics of adjacent segment (AS) degeneration and disease have been increasingly discussed with the development and adoption of motion preserving devices. AS degeneration is defined as new degenerative radiographic changes at a spinal level immediately above or below surgically treated levels. When this degeneration is associated with clinical symptoms, including radiculopathy, myelopathy, or mechanical instability, then the appropriate terminology is AS disease. Controversy exists as to whether AS disease is primarily due to the natural progression of an underlying degenerative process or an accelerated process due to increased forces placed on adjacent segments following fusion surgery. In theory, motion preserving devices would eliminate or significantly decrease any accelerated degeneration related to fusion and increased biomechanical stress. Both clinical and laboratory studies have addressed AS degeneration and disease as well as the factors leading to their development. In this chapter, we will review these studies as well as examine the evidence basis regarding the effect of motion preservation technology on the incidence of AS disease.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bohlman HH, Emery SE, Goodfellow DB, Jones PK (1993) Robinson anterior cervical discectomy and arthrodesis for cervical radiculopathy. Long-term follow-up of one hundred and twenty-two patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75:1298–1307

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burkus JK, Traynelis VC, Haid RW, Mummaneni PV (2014) Clinical and radiographic analysis of an artificial cervical disc: 7-year follow-up from the prestige prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 21:516–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cauthen JC, Kinard RE, Vogler JB, Jackson DE, DePaz OB, Hunter OL, Wasserburger LB, Williams VM (1998) Outcome analysis of noninstrumented anterior cervical discectomy and interbody fusion in 348 patients. Spine 23:188–192

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Coric D, Cassis J, Carew JD, Bolets MO (2010) Prospective study of cervical arthroplasty in 98 patients involved in 1 of 3 separate investigation device exemption studies from a single investigation site with a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 13:715–721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coric D, Nunley PD, Guyer RD, Musante D, Carmody CN, Gordon CR, Lauryssen C, Ohnmeiss DD, Med D, Boltes MO (2011) A prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kineflex/C artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum of 2-year follow up. J Neurosurg Spine 15:348–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coric D, Kim PK, Clemente JD, Boltes MO, Nussbaum M, James S (2013) Prospective randomized study of cervical arthroplasty and anterior cerical discectomy and fusion with long-term follow-up: results in 74 patients from a single site. J Neurosurg Spine 18:36–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins BH, Robertson JT, Gill SS (1988) Surgical experience with an implanted artificial cervical joint. J Neurosurg 88:943–948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis RJ, Nunley PD, Kim KD, Hisey MS, Jackson RJ, Bae HW, Hoffman GA, Gaede SE, Danielson GO, Gordon C, Stone MB (2015) Two-level total disc replacement with Mobi-C cervical artificial disc versus anterior discectomy and fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial with 4-year follow-up results. J Neurosurg Spine 22:15–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eck JC, Humhreys SC, Lim TH, Jeong ST, Kim JG, Hodges SD, An HS (2002) Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion. Spine 27:2431–2434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernstrom U (1966) Arthroplasty with intercorporal endoprosthesis in herniated disc and in painful disc. Acta Chir Scand Suppl 355:154–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffin J, Geusens E, Vantomme N, Quints E, Waerzeggers Y, Depreitere B, Van Calenbergh F, van Loon J (2004) Long-term follow-up after interbody fusion of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord Tech 17:79–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gore DR, Sepic SB (1998) Anterior discectomy and fusion for painful cervical disc disease. A report of 50 patients with an average follow-up of 21 years. Spine 23:2047–2051

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 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. Spine 34:101–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA, Jones PK, Bohlman HH (1999) Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg 81:519–528

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Javedan SP, Dickman CA (1999) Cause of adjacent-segment disease after spinal fusion. Lancet 354:530–531

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez-Espina CG, Amirouche F, Havalad V (2006) Multilevel cervical fusion and its effect on disc degeneration and osteophyte formation. Spine 31:972–978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lunsford LD, Bissonette DJ, Jannetta PJ, Sheptak PE, Zorub DS (1980) Anterior surgery for cervical disease. Part 1: treatment of lateral cervical disc herniation in 253 cases. J Neurosurg 53:1–11

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maldonado CV, Paz RC, Martin CB (2011) Adjacent-level degeneration after cervical arthroplasty versus fusion. Eur Spine J 20:S403–S407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsumoto M, Fujimura Y, Suzuki N, Nishi Y, Nakamura M, Yabe Y, Shiga H (1998) MRI of cervical intervertebral discs in asymptomatic subjects. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:19–24

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McAfee PC, Reah C, Gilder K, Eisermann L, Cunningham B (2012) A meta-analysis of comparative outcomes following cervical arthroplasty or anterior cervical fusion. Spine 37:943–952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 6:198–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunley PD, Jawahar A, Kerr EJ, Gordon CJ, Cavanaugh DA, Birdson EM, Stocks M, Danielson G (2012) Factors affecting the incidence of symptomatic adjacent-level disease in cervical spine after total disc arthroplasty. Spine 37:445–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okada E, Matsumoto M, Ichihara D, Chiba K, Toyama Y, Fujiwara H, Momoshima S, Nishiwaki Y, Hashimoto T, Ogawa J, Watanabe M, Takahata T (2009) Aging of the ervical spine in healthy volunteers: a 10-year longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging study. Spine 34:706–712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radcliff K, Zigler J, Zigler J (2015) Costs of cervical disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for treatment of single-level cervical disc disease: an analysis of the blue health intelligence database for acute and long-term costs and complications. Spine 40:521–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radcliff K, Coric D, Albert T (2016) Five-year clinical results of cervical total disc replacement compared with anterior discectomy and fusion for treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 25:213–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reitz H, Joubert MJ (1964) Intractable headache and cervico-brachialgia treated by complete replacement of cervical intervertebral dis with a metal prosthesis. S Afr Med J 38:881–884

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saavedra-Pozo FM, Deusdara RAM, Benzel ED (2015) Adjacent segement disease perspective and review of the literature. Ochsner J 14:78–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Upadhyaya CD, Wu JC, Haid RW, Traynelis VC, Tay B, Coric D, Trost G, Mummaneni PV (2012) Analysis of three United States Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption cervical arthroplasty trials. J Neurosurg Spine 16:216–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaccaro A, Beutler W, Peppelman W, Marzluff JM, Highsmith J, Mugglin A, DeMuth G, Gudipally M, Baker KH (2013) Clinical outcomes with selectively constrained SECURE-C cervical disc arthroplasty. Spine 38:2227–2239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield CC, Skrzypiec D, Jackowski A, Adams MA (2003) Internal stress distribution in cervical intervertebral discs. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:441–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurological Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA

    Jonathan Parish & Domagoj Coric

  2. Carolina Neurosurgery and Spine Associates, Charlotte, NC, USA

    Jonathan Parish & Domagoj Coric

Authors
  1. Jonathan Parish
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Domagoj Coric
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Parish .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Allegheny General Hospital Department of Neurosurgery, Mars, PA, USA

    Boyle Cheng

Section Editor information

  1. Department of Neurological Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center and Carolina Neurosurgery and Spine Associates, Charlotte, NC, USA

    Domagoj Coric

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Parish, J., Coric, D. (2019). Adjacent-Level Disease: Fact and Fiction. In: Cheng, B. (eds) Handbook of Spine Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33037-2_82-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33037-2_82-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-33037-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-33037-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Biomedicine and Life SciencesReference Module Biomedical and Life Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation