Abstract
Background Context: One of the main postulated basic principles of total disc replacement (TDR) is the preservation of flexion/extension ability. In neutral position the ideal disc prosthesis should not stay in maximal possible extension which would imply an impingement of the prosthesis. An impingement would cause shear strains on the prosthesis endplates which probably accelerate loosening. Moreover an additional extension ability from the neutral position would indicate no impingement in the facet joints in neutral position and a physiological movement capability.
Purpose: The purpose of study was to evaluate a possible impingement of the prosthesis or facet joints after TDR in neutral position.
Study design: Prospective evaluation of radiological outcome measures after total disc replacement.
Patient sample: The patients (19 female, 10 male) ranged from 29 to 56 years of age (mean: 42.46.5 years). The mean follow up interval averaged 13.2 months (range: 6 – 35 months). The diagnosis of degenerative disc disease was confirmed by MRI (black disc) and discography (positive „Memory pain“). Pain relief after facet joint infiltration was an exlucsion criteria. All patients had a single-level disc replacement (Prodisc II, Spine Solutions) with the same angulation (6).
Outcome measures: Evaluation of a possible impingement of the prosthesis and impingement of facet joints in neutral position.
Methods: A computer based analysis of pre- and postoperative lateral X-rays in neutral position and dynamic x-rays. The angulation of prosthesis in neutral position and the extension ability in dynamic x-rays were measured.
Results: 15 patients showed no extension ability on dynamic x-rays and 10 of these 15 patients had an impingement with maximum extension of the prosthesis on x-rays in neutral position. In the remaining 14 patients the extension ability averaged pre-/postoperatively 2.3/1.3 (p=0.115). In 4 of the 14 patients the pros-thesis showed an impingement in maximum extension and in 10 patients the prosthesis was not in maximum possible extension.
Conclusion: Due to the constrained design of the Pro-Disc an impingement is possible and was recognized in nearly 30% of the cases. The imbalance of flexion vs extension bending moments with increase in extension bending moments due to resection of the anterior longitudinal ligament and anterior anulus seems to be a possible explanation. It still remains unclear if an impingement will result in facet joint protection or will trigger a loosening of the implant. A prosthesis design which preserves the anterior longitudinal ligament would be probably a possible solution.
Theses abstracts were prepared by Professor Roger Lemaire. Correspondence should be addressed to EFORT Central Office, Freihofstrasse 22, CH-8700 Küsnacht, Switzerland.
