Are Controversial Issues in Cervical Total Disc Replacement Resolved or Unresolved?: A Review of Literature and Recent Updates
10.4184/asj.2018.12.1.178
- Author:
Chun Kun PARK
1
;
Kyeong Sik RYU
Author Information
1. Department of Neurosurgery, Good Doctor Teun Teun Hospital, Anyang, Korea.
- Publication Type:Review
- Keywords:
Cervical vertebrae;
Intervertebral disc degeneration;
Total disc replacement;
Controversial issue;
Prognosis
- MeSH:
Cervical Vertebrae;
Diskectomy;
Female;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Intervertebral Disc Degeneration;
Ossification, Heterotopic;
Prognosis;
Radiculopathy;
Spinal Cord Diseases;
Spine;
Surgeons;
Total Disc Replacement
- From:Asian Spine Journal
2018;12(1):178-192
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Since the launch of cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) in the early 2000s, many clinical studies have reported better outcomes of CTDR compared to those of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. However, CTDR is still a new and innovative procedure with limited indications for clinical application in spinal surgery, particularly, for young patients presenting with soft disc herniation with radiculopathy and/or myelopathy. In addition, some controversial issues related to the assessment of clinical outcomes of CTDR remain unresolved. These issues, including surgical outcomes, adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), heterotopic ossification (HO), wear debris and tissue reaction, and multilevel total disc replacement (TDR) and hybrid surgeries are a common concern of spine surgeons and need to be resolved. Among them, the effect of CTDR on patient outcomes and ASD is theoretically and clinically important; however, this issue remains disputable. Additionally, HO, wear debris, multilevel TDR, and hybrid surgery tend to favor CTDR in terms of their effects on outcomes, but the potential of these factors for jeopardizing patients' safety postoperatively and/or to exert harmful effects on surgical outcomes in longer-term follow-up cannot be ignored. Consequently, it is too early to determine the therapeutic efficacy and cost-effectiveness of CTDR and will require considerable time and studies to provide appropriate answers regarding the same. For these reasons, CTDR requires longer-term follow-up data.
