Previous Page  5 / 29 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 5 / 29 Next Page
Page Background

Page 23

Notes:

Volume 3, Issue 4 (Suppl)

J Clin Exp Orthop

ISSN:2471-8416

Osteoporosis and Arthroplasty 2017

December 04-05, 2017

&

11

th

International Conference on

Joint Event

OSTEOPOROSIS, ARTHRITIS & MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS

December 04-05, 2017 | Madrid, Spain

10

th

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ARTHROPLASTY

An

in vivo

study of three artificial cervical discs: Are unconstrained designs susceptible to migration?

Jamie L Baisden, Hoon Choi

and

Narayan Oganandan

Medical College of Wisconsin, USA

Statement of the Problem:

Artificial cervical discs (ACDs) have been used, instead of the conventional ACDF in the military. ACDs

have potential advantages of motion preservation and reduction of adjacent segment degeneration. Disc implants are classified as

constrained, semi-constrained, and unconstrained device types. There have been independent reports of anterior migration and,

sometimes disintegration, of non-constrained artificial discs.

In vivo

studies investigating the potential migration of the artificial disc

are limited.

Purpose:

The objective of this study is to examine the migration aspects in cervical discs using an

in vivo

model capable of simulating

the axial load on the neck, and this mimics the human.

Methods:

C3-C4 ACD was performed with commercial implants in twelve adult alpine caprines. There were three groups: Group A

received constrained; group B received semi-constrained; group C received unconstrained ACD. Intra- and postoperative radiographs

were performed to confirm hardware position. Goats were monitored for six months postoperatively. All goats tolerated cervical

arthroplasty well and had satisfactory placement of the ACD implant on intra-operative radiography. There was no migration of the

implants in Groups A and B. Complete anterior extrusion of the inferior plate out of the disc space and disintegration of the implant

occurred within one week after surgery in three goats in Group C. The fourth goat had anterior extrusion at five weeks.

Conclusions&Significance:

Biomechanical responses under flexion/extension loading depend on the type of theACD. Unconstrained

ACD implants rely on axial loading and limited range of motion of the disc segment to preserve integrity. Unconstrained ACD

implants may not be the most efficacious in individuals with a hypermobile neck and/or occupation involving head supported mass/

helmets resulting in additional axial loads and repetitive motions of the cervical spinal column regions.

Recent Publications

1.

Alvin MD, et al. (2014) Cervical arthroplasty: a critical review of the literature. The Spine Journal 14 (9):2231-2245.

2.

Ozbek Z, et al. (2017) Implant migration in cervical disk arthroplasty. World Neurosurgery 97:390-397.

3.

Tsermoulas G and Bhattathiri PS (2013) Anterior migration of prosthesis following cervical arthroplasty. British Journal of

Neurosurgery 27(1):132-133.

4.

Wagner S C, et al. (2014) Implant migration after Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty. The Spine Journal 14(10):2513-2514.

5.

Wagner S C, et al. (2016) Traumatic migration of the bryan cervical disc arthroplasty. Global Spine Journal 6(1): e15-20.

Biography

Jamie L Baisden is a Professor of Neurosurgery at the Medical College of Wisconsin specializing in Complex Spine. She has completed fellowships in Complex

Spinal Surgery and Spinal Cord Medicine and has a Master’s in Medical Management from USC. Her research interests include spinal biomechanics, spinal

trauma, and evidence based medicine guideline development for spinal disorders.

jbaisden@mcw.edu

Jamie L Baisden et al., J Clin Exp Orthop 2017, 3:4(Suppl)

DOI: 10.4172/2471-8416-C1-002