Go Back   ISPINE.ORG Forum > Main forums > Abstracts and Articles
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Abstracts and Articles Discuss Two retroperitoneal surgical approaches for total disc arthroplasty in the Main forums forums; From: PubMed. Spine. 2008 Jan 15;33(2):205-9. A comparison of two retroperitoneal surgical approaches for total disc ...

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 06-26-2008, 07:19 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 196
Default Two retroperitoneal surgical approaches for total disc arthroplasty

From: PubMed. Spine. 2008 Jan 15;33(2):205-9.

A comparison of two retroperitoneal surgical approaches for total disc arthroplasty of the lumbar spine
Bendo JA, Quirno M, Errico T, Spivak JM, Goldstein J

Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective outcome data analysis.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if there is a significant difference between the midline rectus (MR) and the paramedian lateral rectus (PLR) approaches with regard to implant position for lumbar disc arthroplasty. To establish that a less than optimal implant position may influence clinical outcome.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Little is known about the impact of varying surgical approaches on lumbar artificial disc implant position and clinical outcome.
METHODS: Fifty-seven patients were obtained from one center participating Food and Drug Administration study for the evaluation of the lumbar Prodisc-L. Two different surgical access techniques were compared; the MR and left PLR. Two independent evaluators calculated the postoperative radiographical displacement from the midline in the coronal and sagittal planes for each of the surgical techniques. Pre- and postoperative clinical outcomes were evaluated to determine which surgical access technique was associated with better outcomes and if there was a clinical correlation with technical accuracy.
RESULTS: The PLR approach was associated with greater malalignment of the prosthesis in both the coronal and sagittal planes compared with the MR approach. However, the difference was significant only in the sagittal plane (P = 0.021). There was no significant difference in clinical outcome for either approach (P = 0.34). Patients with >or=5 mm prosthetic displacement from the midvertebral point had significantly worse Owestry disability index scores than patients with <3 mm malalignment in both the coronal and sagittal planes regardless of the surgical approach employed.
CONCLUSION: The finding of a statistically significant more anteriorly displaced position in the sagittal plane of the total disc arthroplasty using the PLR approach may indicate a need to change to the MR approach. This study also demonstrates that patients with >or=5 mm prosthetic deviation from midline in either the coronal or sagittal planes had diminished clinical outcomes regardless of the approach used.

Keywords: lumbar total disc replacement; surgical approach; clinical and radiographic outcomes;CHARITE(TM) ARTIFICIAL DISC; CLINICAL-OUTCOMES; PRODISC-II; FUSION; REPLACEMENT; TRIAL
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 12:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.