Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Other Publications
    • ijss

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
International Journal of Spine Surgery
  • My alerts
International Journal of Spine Surgery

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Follow ijss on Twitter
  • Visit ijss on Facebook
Research ArticleArticles

Long-term Evaluation of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with the Mobi-C© Cervical Disc: A Randomized, Prospective, Multicenter Clinical Trial with Seven-Year Follow-up

Kris Radcliff, Reginald J. Davis, Michael S. Hisey, Pierce D. Nunley, Gregory A. Hoffman, Robert J. Jackson, Hyun W. Bae, Todd Albert and Dom Coric
International Journal of Spine Surgery January 2017, 11 (4) 31; DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/4031
Kris Radcliff
1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rothman Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Egg Harbor, NJ
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Reginald J. Davis
2Greater Baltimore Neurosurgical Associates, Baltimore, MD
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael S. Hisey
3Texas Back Institute, Plano, TX
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Pierce D. Nunley
4Spine Institute of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gregory A. Hoffman
5Orthopedics Northeast, Fort Wayne, IN
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert J. Jackson
6Orange County Neurosurgical Associates, Laguna Hills, CA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hyun W. Bae
7Cedars-Sinai Spine Center, Los Angeles, CA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Todd Albert
8Hospital for Special Surgery, Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dom Coric
9Carolinas Medical Center, Carolina Neurosurgery & Spine Associates, Charlotte, NC
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Fig. 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 1

    The Mobi-C© Cervical Disc.

  • Fig. 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 2

    Overall treatment success of two-level TDR and ACDF.

  • Fig. 3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 3

    Patient-reported outcomes for two-level TDR and ACDF Patients from preoperative to 7 years follow-up. P-values are from global test of the difference between TDR and ACDF patient scores, generalized across all time points. Top Left: Mean NDI scores. Top Right: Mean VAS Neck Pain scores. Middle Left: Mean VAS arm pain scores. Middle Right: Mean SF-12 MCS. Bottom Left: Mean SF-12 PCS.

  • Fig. 4
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 4

    Range of motion in flexion/extension (F/E) and lateral bending (LB) for two level patients. Top: Range of motion at the superior level. Bottom: Range of motion at the inferior level.

  • Fig. 5
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 5

    Kaplan-Meier survival function estimates for subsequent surgery in two-level patients. P-value based on log-rank test. Left: Subsequent surgery for index level indications. Right: Subsequent surgery at the adjacent level.

  • Fig. 6
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 6

    Overall treatment success of one-level TDR and ACDF.

  • Fig. 7
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 7

    Patient reported outcomes for one-level TDR and ACDF Patients from preoperative to 7 years follow-up. P-values are from a global test of the difference between TDR and ACDF patient scores, generalized across all time points. Top Left: Mean NDI scores. Top Right: Mean VAS Neck Pain Scores. Middle Left: Mean VAS Arm Pain Scores. Middle Right: Mean SF-12 PCS. Bottom Left: Mean SF-12 MCS.

  • Fig. 8
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 8

    Range of motion in flexion/extension (F/E) and lateral bending (LB) for one level patients.

  • Fig. 9
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 9

    Kaplan-Meier survival function estimates for subsequent surgery in one-level patients. P-value based on log-rank test. Left: Subsequent surgery for index level indications. Right: Subsequent surgery at the adjacent level.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria.

    Inclusion Criteria
     • Age 18-69 years;
     • Symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease in one or two levels between C3-C7 with:
    • ◦ Myelopathy or myeloradiculopathy and/or

    • ◦ Decreased muscle strength and/or

    • ◦ Abnormal sensation and/or abnormal reflexes;

     • Deficit confirmed by CT, MRI, or X-ray;
     • NDI Score of > 30/100;
     • Unresponsive to non-operative treatment for at least 6 weeks or presence of progressive symptoms or signs of nerve root/spinal cord compression despite continued non-operative treatment;
     • No prior surgical procedures at the operative level and no prior fusions at any cervical level;
     • Physically and mentally able and willing to comply with the protocol;
     • Signed informed consent;
     • Willingness to discontinue all use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) from one week before surgery until 3 months after surgery;
    Exclusion Criteria
     • More than two vertebral levels requiring treatment;
     • Immobile levels between C1 and C7 from any cause;
     • Any prior surgery at the operative level or any prior fusion at any cervical level;
     • Disc height less than 3 mm;
     • T-score less than -1.5 (osteoporosis evaluation);
     • Paget's disease, osteomalacia, or any other metabolic bone disease other than osteoporosis;
     • Active infection of surgical site or history of or anticipated treatment for systemic infection including HIV and/or Hepatitis C;
     • Active malignancy: a history of any invasive malignancy (except non-melanoma skin cancer), unless treated with curative intent with no clinical signs or symptoms of malignancy in the past 5 years;
     • Marked instability of the cervical spine on resting lateral or flexion-extension radiographs;
     • Known allergy to device materials including cobalt, chromium, molybdenum, or polyethylene;
     • Segmental kyphosis of greater than 11° at treatment or adjacent levels;
     • Rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, or other autoimmune disease;
     • Any diseases or conditions that would preclude accurate clinical evaluation;
     • Daily, high-dose oral and/or inhaled steroids or a history of chronic use of high dose steroids;
     • Morbid obesity (BMI > 40);
     • Use of any other investigational drug or medical device within 30 days prior to surgery;
     • Pending litigation relating to spinal injury (worker's compensation not included);
     • Smoking more than one pack of cigarettes per day;
     • Reported to have a mental illness or belonging to a vulnerable population.
    • View popup
    Table 2

    Preoperative Patient Characteristics for TDR and ACDF.

    2-Level1-Level
    CharacteristicTDRACDFTDRACDF
    N22510516481
    Age (years) (range)45.3 ± 8.1 (21-67)46.2 ± 8.0(27-65)43.3 ± 9.2(23-67)44.0 ± 8.2(27-66)
    Gender n (%)
    Male113 (50.2%)45 (42.9%)78 (47.6%)36 (44.4%)
    Female112 (49.8%)60 (57.1%)86 (52.4%)45 (55.6%)
    BMI (SD)27.6 (4.5)28.1 (4.2)27.3 (4.4)27.4 (4.2)
    Work Status n (%)
    Able to work141 (62.7%)64 (61.0%)108 (65.9%)46 (56.8%)
    Not able to work50 (22.2%)22 (21.0%)37 (22.6%)22 (27.2%)
    Does not work34 (15.1%)19 (18.1%)19 (11.6%)13 (16.0%)
    Worker's Compensation n (%)
    Receiving11 (4.9%)7 (6.7%)6 (3.7%)5 (6.2%)
    Not Receiving214 (95.1%)98 (93.3%)158 (96.3%)76 (93.8%)
    Treated Segment(s)
    C3-C51 (0.4%)2 (1.9%)
    C4-C660 (26.7%)23 (21.9%)
    C5-C7164 (72.9%)80 (76.2%)
    C3-C41 (0.6%)4 (4.9%)
    C4-C511 (6.7%)2 (2.5%)
    C5-C692 (56.1%)46 (26.8%)
    C6-C760 (36.6%)29 (35.8%)
    • Values given are mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Overall success and components of success for 2-level TDR and ACDF.

    TDRACDFDifference
    Composite success60.8%34.6%26.2%*
    NDI success79.0%58.0%21.0%†
    Subsequent Surgery4.4%16.2%11.8%†
    Neurologic failure6.4%17.1%10.7%†
    Adverse events5.3%8.6%3.3%
    Radiographic failure10.1%9.1%1.0%
    • ↵* Superiority of TDR vs. ACDF established with 95% lower confidence bound of difference > 0%.

    • ↵† p < 0.05; Fisher’s exact test.

    • View popup
    Table 4

    Outcomes for 2-Level TDR and ACDF.

    StudyOutcomeTreatment armBaseline7 YearsMean Δ at 7 years*P value†Recovery Ratio
    2-LevelNDITDR53.8 ± 15.418.0 ± 19.135.6 ± 20.30.0467%
    ACDF55.7 ± 15.226.2 ± 22.428.2 ± 21.753%
    VAS neck painTDR71.2 ± 20.519.0 ± 27.150.9 ± 30.60.2172%
    ACDF75.1 ± 18.928.7 ± 30.444.1 ± 33.957%
    VAS arm painTDR68.8 ± 25.015.9 ± 25.754.1 ± 32.80.9974%
    ACDF73.1 ± 21.918.4 ± 27.055.1 ± 32.076%
    SF-12 PCSTDR33.4 ± 6.746.3 ± 11.112.7 ± 10.90.5519%
    ACDF32.5 ± 7.743.7 ± 11.910.3 ± 11.415%
    SF-12 MCSTDR41.9 ± 11.352.0 ± 10.110.5 ± 12.70.3016%
    ACDF42.0 ± 12.049.1 ± 12.77.2 ± 14.310%
    • ↵* Mean of differences in outcomes between 7 years and preoperative follow-up.

    • ↵† Adjusted p-value for difference in change from baseline between TDR and ACDF at 7-year follow-up.Values given are mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated.NDI, neck disability index; VAS, visual analog scale; SF-12, Short Form 12-item Health Survey; MCS, Mental Composite Score; PCS, Physical Composite Score.

    • View popup
    Table 5

    NDI and pain status (% of patients) at last follow-up in 2-level TDR and ACDF.

    NDIVAS Neck Pain
    Status*TDRACDFP value†TDRACDFP value†
    Improved80.8%70.2%0.1086.0%77.7%0.15
    Not improved16.5%25.9%9.0%15.5%
    Worse2.7%3.8%5.0%6.8%
    • ↵* NDI: Improved: ≥15/100 point increase from baseline. Not improved: < 15 point change (±) from baseline. Worse: ≤ -15/100 point decrease from baseline. Neck pain: Improved: ≥10/100 point increase from baseline. Not improved: < 10 point change (±) from baseline. Worse: ≤ -10/100 point decrease from baseline.

    • ↵† Fisher's exact test.

    • View popup
    Table 6

    Radiographic Outcomes for 2-Level TDR and ACDF at 7 years.

    OutcomeTreatmentSuperior LevelInferior Level
    ROM in Flexion/ExtensionTDR9.3 ± 5.8°7.4 ± 5.2°
    ACDF0.2 ± 0.2°0.6 ± 0.8°
    ROM in Lateral BendingTDR4.8 ± 3.4°4.9 ± 3.4°
    ACDF0.4 ± 0.4°0.7 ± 0.9°
    FSU Height Change from PreOpTDR0.8 ± 1.2 mm0.2 ± 1.1 mm
    ACDF1.5 ± 0.8 mm1.6 ± 0.9 mm
    FSU Height Change from PostOp*TDR-0.5 ± 0.4 mm-0.4 ± 0.4 mm
    ACDF-0.7 ± 0.7 mm-0.9 ± 0.9 mm
    Adjacent Segment DegenerationTDR37.5% (57/152)30.3% (33/109)
    ACDF80.8% (42/52)66.7% (28/42)
    • Values given are mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated.

    • ↵* Prior to discharge from hospital.

    • View popup
    Table 7

    Overall success and components of success for 1-level TDR and ACDF.

    TDRACDFDifference
    Composite success55.2%50.0%5.2%*
    Subsequent Surgery3.0%12.3%9.3%†
    Radiographic failure9.3%4.5%4.8%
    Adverse events6.1%3.7%2.4%
    NDI success76.5%77.8%1.3%
    Neurologic failure11.4%11.5%0.1%
    • ↵* Non-inferiority of TDR vs. ACDF established with 95% lower confidence bound of difference > -10%.

    • ↵† p < 0.05; Fisher’s exact test.

    • View popup
    Table 8

    Outcomes for 1-Level TDR and ACDF.

    StudyOutcomeTreatment armBaseline7 YearsMean Δ at 7 years*P-value†Recovery Ratio
    1-LevelNDITDR54.0 ± 14.017.9 ± 19.735.4 ± 20.60.9967%
    ACDF54.1 ± 14.618.2 ± 17.633.8 ± 20.264%
    VAS neck painTDR70.8 ± 22.419.0 ± 26.951.1 ± 33.30.8971%
    ACDF70.1 ± 21.521.1 ± 24.448.2 ± 30.167%
    VAS arm painTDR71.0 ± 23.812.8 ± 23.357.5 ± 33.70.3573%
    ACDF70.7 ± 26.820.9 ± 27.153.2 ± 36.263%
    SF-12 PCSTDR32.5 ± 5.947.8 ± 11.215.2 ± 11.50.1122%
    ACDF33.8 ± 6.446.1 ± 10.111.6 ± 10.717%
    SF-12 MCSTDR42.1 ± 13.150.4 ± 10.68.0 ± 13.70.9911%
    ACDF42.2 ± 10.451.3 ± 10.68.3 ± 11.713%
    • ↵* Mean of differences in outcomes between 7 years and preoperative follow-up.

    • ↵† Adjusted p-value for difference in change from baseline between TDR and ACDF at 7-year follow-up. Values given are mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated. NDI, neck disability index; VAS, visual analog scale; SF-12, Short Form 12-item Health Survey; MCS, Mental Composite Score; PCS, Physical Composite Score.

    • View popup
    Table 9

    NDI and pain status (% of patients) at last follow-up in 1-level TDR and ACDF.

    NDIVAS Neck Pain
    Status*TDRACDFP value†TDRACDFP value†
    Improved84.6%84.8%0.7287.5%83.3%0.21
    Not improved14.2%12.7%8.8%15.4%
    Worse1.2%2.5%3.8%1.3%
    • ↵* NDI: Improved: ≥15/100 point increase from baseline. Not improved: < 15 point change (±) from baseline. Worse: ≤ -15/100 point decrease from baseline. Neck pain: Improved: ≥10/100 point increase from baseline. Not improved: < 10 point change (±) from baseline. Worse: ≤ -10/100 point decrease from baseline.

    • ↵† Fisher’s exact test.

    • View popup
    Table 10

    Radiographic outcomes for 1-Level TDR and ACDF at 7 years.

    OutcomeTreatment7 Years
    ROM in Flexion/ExtensionTDR10.2 ± 6.3°
    ACDF0.2 ± 0.2°
    ROM in Lateral BendingTDR5.1 ± 3.5°
    ACDF0.4 ± 0.4°
    FSU Height Change from PreOpTDR1.5 ± 0.8 mm
    ACDF0.2 ± 1.3 mm
    FSU Height Change from PostOp*TDR-0.5 ± 0.5 mm
    ACDF-0.7 ± 0.7 mm
    Adjacent Segment Degeneration
    Superior LevelTDR40.4% (42/104)
    ACDF65.1% (28/43)
    Inferior LevelTDR43.8% (38/89)
    ACDF63.0% (17/27)
    • Values given are mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated.

    • ↵* Prior to discharge from hospital.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

International Journal of Spine Surgery
Vol. 11, Issue 4
1 Jan 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on International Journal of Spine Surgery.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Long-term Evaluation of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with the Mobi-C© Cervical Disc: A Randomized, Prospective, Multicenter Clinical Trial with Seven-Year Follow-up
(Your Name) has sent you a message from International Journal of Spine Surgery
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the International Journal of Spine Surgery web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Long-term Evaluation of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with the Mobi-C© Cervical Disc: A Randomized, Prospective, Multicenter Clinical Trial with Seven-Year Follow-up
Kris Radcliff, Reginald J. Davis, Michael S. Hisey, Pierce D. Nunley, Gregory A. Hoffman, Robert J. Jackson, Hyun W. Bae, Todd Albert, Dom Coric
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jan 2017, 11 (4) 31; DOI: 10.14444/4031

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Long-term Evaluation of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with the Mobi-C© Cervical Disc: A Randomized, Prospective, Multicenter Clinical Trial with Seven-Year Follow-up
Kris Radcliff, Reginald J. Davis, Michael S. Hisey, Pierce D. Nunley, Gregory A. Hoffman, Robert J. Jackson, Hyun W. Bae, Todd Albert, Dom Coric
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jan 2017, 11 (4) 31; DOI: 10.14444/4031
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Acknowledgements
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Adjacent Segment Pathology After Treatment With Cervical Disc Arthroplasty or Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion, Part 2: Clinical Results at 7-Year Follow-Up
  • Adjacent Segment Pathology After Treatment With Cervical Disc Arthroplasty or Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion, Part 1: Radiographic Results at 7-Year Follow-Up
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Validity and reliability of a novel patient reported outcome tool to evaluate post-operative dysphagia, odynophagia, and voice (DOV) disability after anterior cervical procedures
  • Surgical Revision after Sacroiliac Joint Fixation or Fusion
  • A Rare Case of T1-2 Thoracic Disc Herniation Mimicking Cervical Radiculopathy
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • cervical total disc replacement
  • ACDF
  • degenerative disc disease
  • Mobi-C

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Content
  • Archive

More Information

  • About IJSS
  • About ISASS
  • Privacy Policy

More

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Feedback

Other Services

  • Author Instructions
  • Join ISASS
  • Reprints & Permissions

© 2025 International Journal of Spine Surgery

International Journal of Spine Surgery Online ISSN: 2211-4599

Powered by HighWire