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

Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with Prestige LP Disc Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Seven-Year Outcomes

Matthew F. Gornet, J. Kenneth Burkus, Mark E. Shaffrey, Hui Nian and Frank E. Harrell
International Journal of Spine Surgery January 2016, 10 24; DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/3024
Matthew F. Gornet
1The Orthopedic Center of St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. Kenneth Burkus
2Wilderness Spine Services, The Hughston Clinic, Columbus, Georgia
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark E. Shaffrey
3Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hui Nian
4Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Department of Biostatistics, Nashville, Tennessee
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Frank E. Harrell Jr
4Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Department of Biostatistics, Nashville, Tennessee
PhD
  • 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 Prestige LP Cervical Disc.

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

    Mean Neck Disability Index (NDI), angular motion at target level, Short-Form-36 Physical Component Summary (SF-36 PCS), Short-Form-36 Mental Component Summary (SF-36 MCS), and neck pain and arm pain scores of the 2 treatment groups at baseline and postoperative time points. Vertical bars indicate 99% confidence intervals of the means.

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

    Posterior distributions of differences in success rates of efficacy and neurological variables between the 2 treatment groups. Horizontal bold lines indicate 95% HPD, upper and lower limits of which are also labeled. Dashed vertical line is upper limit of noninferiority and dotted vertical line is upper limit of superiority. FSU = functional spinal unit, HPD = highest posterior density, NDI = Neck Disability Index, SF-36 MCS = Short-Form-36 Mental Component Summary, SF-36 PCS = Short-Form-36 Physical Component Summary.

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

    Time-to-event analyses (Kaplan-Meier curves) showing cumulative probabilities by adverse event category for the investigational and control groups. P values are based on Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for propensity score.

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

    Time-to-event analyses (Kaplan-Meier curves) showing cumulative probabilities of the classifications of secondary surgeries for the investigational and control groups. P values are based on Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for propensity score.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Definition of Overall Success. All of the following were required for a patient's outcome to be considered an Overall Success (Reprinted with permission from Gornet MF, Burkus JK, Shaffrey ME, Argires PJ, Nian H, Harrell FE: Cervical disc arthroplasty with PRESTIGE LP disc versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a prospective, multicenter investigational device exemption study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015 Jul 31:1-16. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 26230424.22).

    VariablesDefinition
    Neck Disability Index (NDI) Success≥15-point improvement postoperatively compared to preoperative score
    Neurological Status SuccessMaintenance or improvement in postoperative neurological status (motor function, sensory function, and reflexes) compared to preoperative condition
    Functional Spinal Unit (Disc Height) SuccessFunctional spinal unit anterior or posterior measurement height declined by no more than 2 mm vs. the 6-week postoperative assessment
    No serious adverse event classified as implant or implant/surgical procedure associatedSerious AE = Grade 3 or Grade 4 per World Health Organization criteria (typically, resulting in ER visit or hospitalization)
    No secondary surgical procedure classified as a “failure”Supplemental fixation, removal or revision = treatment failure. Reoperation or other surgical procedure ≠ treatment failure
    • AE = adverse event, ER = emergency room.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Patient demographic and preoperative characteristics: median, interquartile range, (mean ± standard deviation) or percent (count) (Reprinted with permission from Gornet MF, Burkus JK, Shaffrey ME, Argires PJ, Nian H, Harrell FE: Cervical disc arthroplasty with PRESTIGE LP disc versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a prospective, multicenter investigational device exemption study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015 Jul 31:1-16. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 26230424.22).

    Investigational
    (N = 280)
    Control
    (N = 265)
    p Value before PS Adjustment*P value after PS Adjustment
    PS as Continuous Covariate†PS Stratificationt‡
    Age (yrs)39 44 49(44.5±8.8)38 44 49(43.9±8.8)0.3690.9970.873
    Height (in)64 67 71(67.7±4.1)64 67 71(67.5±4.2)0.6220.9980.946
    Weight (lbs)154 180 218(186.9±45.0)155 181 210(184.7±41.5)0.5650.9980.962
    NDI score44 54 66(55.5±14.7)44 58 68(56.4±15.9)0.4990.9970.952
    SF36 PCS score27.4 32.4 36.7(32.2±7.4)27.1 31.5 36.6(32.0±7.5)0.7750.9990.898
    SF36 MCS score34.9 46.5 53.6(44.5±11.5)33.1 42.1 53.0(42.7±12.4)0.0780.9930.924
    Neck pain score50 70 81(60.7±20.8)56 72 81(69.3±21.5)0.1900.9950.987
    Arm pain score40 64 80(59.6±26.3)42 67 83(62.4±28.5)0.2370.9950.960
    Female53.9%(151)54.0%(143)1.0001.0000.881
    Race0.0750.9970.708
     Caucasian96.8%(271)91.7%(243)
     Black2.5%(7)4.9%(13)
     Asian0.0%(0)0.8%(2)
     Hispanic0.4%(1)2.3%(6)
     Other0.4%(1)0.4%(1)
    Marital status0.1090.9900.749
     Single14.3%(40)12.1%(32)
     Married67.5%(189)77.0%(204)
     Divorced15.0%(42)9.1%(24)
     Separated2.5%(7)1.1%(3)
     Widowed0.7%(2)0.8%(2)
    Education level0.0630.9910.877
      < High school5.4%(15)5.3%(14)
     High school20.5%(57)29.2%(77)
      > High school74.1%(206)65.5%(173)
    Workers’ compensation case11.4%(32)13.2%(35)0.6160.9980.864
    Unresolved spinal litigation case12.1%(34)12.1%(32)1.0001.0000.928
    Tobacco used26.4%(74)34.7%(92)0.0450.9910.893
    Alcohol used53.6%(150)53.2%(141)1.0001.0000.900
    Working before operation67.1%(188)62.6%(166)0.3120.9960.968
    Non-narcotic relaxant medication use74.3%(208)71.1%(187)0.4620.9970.836
    Weak narcotic medication use47.7%(133)48.3%(127)0.9541.0000.843
    Strong narcotic medication use22.2%(62)22.0%(58)1.0001.0000.995
    Muscle relaxant medication use35.8%(100)43.2%(114)0.0970.9930.977
    Time to start having symptoms0.4880.9990.992
      < 6 weeks7.9%(22)5.7%(15)
     6 weeks to 6 months30.4%(85)33.6%(89)
      > 6 months61.8%(173)60.8%(161)
    Normal motor functions38.2%(107)59.6%(158)<0.0010.9790.751
    Normal sensory functions41.8%(117)50.9%(135)0.0400.9910.890
    Normal reflexes66.4%(186)61.1%(162)0.2310.9950.888
    Normal gait score93.6%(262)77.0%(204)<0.0010.8810.467
    Positive foraminal compression test42.9%(120)54.3%(144)0.0090.9890.875
    Treatment level0.2010.9890.981
     C3-C41.4%(4)3.8%(10)
     C4-C57.5%(21)5.7%(15)
     C5-C652.5%(147)56.2%(149)
     C6-C738.6%(108)34.3%(91)
    • NDI = Neck Disability Index, MCS = Mental Component Score, PCS = Physical Component Score, PS = propensity score.

    • ↵* P values are from ANOVA for continuous variables and from Chi-square test for categorical variables.

    • ↵† For continuous variables, p-values are from ANCOVA and for categorical variables, from logistic regression; propensity score as a continuous covariate for both.

    • ‡ For continuous variables, p-values are from ANCOVA and for categorical variables, from the CMH test.

    • †,‡For categorical variables with multiple categories, they were dichotomized (except for treatment level) in the logistic regression models for calculating propensity scores to increase model stability and to check the covariate balance between treatment groups.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Study patient inclusion and exclusion criteria. Reprinted with permission from Gornet MF, Burkus JK, Shaffrey ME, Argires PJ, Nian H, Harrell FE: Cervical disc arthroplasty with PRESTIGE LP disc versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a prospective, multicenter investigational device exemption study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015 Jul 31:1-16. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 26230424.22

    INCLUSION (ALL)EXCLUSION (ANY)
    • Cervical degenerative disc disease defined as intractable radiculopathy and/or myelopathy with at least one of the following items producing symptomatic nerve root and/or spinal cord compression that is documented by patient history [(e.g., pain, functional deficit, and/or neurological deficit radiographic studies (e.g., CT, MRI, x-rays, etc.)]:

    • herniated disc

    • osteophyte formation

    • One level requiring surgical treatment

    • C3-C4 disc to C6-C7 disc level of involvement

    • Unresponsive to nonoperative treatment for approximately six weeks or has the presence of progressive symptoms or signs of nerve root/spinal cord compression in the face of continued nonoperative management

    • No previous surgical intervention at the involved level or any subsequent, planned/staged surgical procedure at the involved or adjacent level(s)

    • Is at least 18 years of age, inclusive, at the time of surgery

    • Preoperative Neck Disability Index score ≥30

    • Has a preoperative neck pain score of ≥20 based on the Preoperative Neck and Arm Pain Questionnaire

    • If a female of child-bearing potential, patient is not pregnant, at the time of surgery

    • Is willing to comply with the study plan and sign the Patient Informed Consent Form

    • Has a cervical spinal condition other than symptomatic cervical disc disease requiring surgical treatment at the involved level;

    • Documented or diagnosed cervical instability defined by dynamic (flexion/extension) radiographs showing:

    • Sagittal plane translation > 3.5 mm or

    • Sagittal plane angulation > 20°

    • More than one cervical level requiring surgical treatment

    • Has a fused level adjacent to the level to be treated

    • Has severe pathology of the facet joints of the involved vertebral bodies

    • Previous surgical intervention at the involved level

    • Has been previously diagnosed with osteopenia or osteomalacia

    • Has any of the following that may be associated with a diagnosis of osteoporosis (if “Yes” to any of the below risk factors, a bone density scan will be required to determine eligibility):

      • Postmenopausal non-Black female over 60 years of age and weighs less than 140 pounds

      • Postmenopausal female that has sustained a non-traumatic hip, spine, or wrist fracture.

    • Male over the age of 70

    • Male over the age of 60 that has sustained a non-traumatic hip or spine fracture

    • If the level of BMD is a T score of -3.5 or lower (i.e., -3.6, -3.7, etc.) or a T score of -2.5 or lower (i.e., -2.6, -2.7, etc.) with vertebral crush fracture, then the patient is excluded from the study

    • Has presence of spinal metastases

    • Has overt or active bacterial infection, either local or systemic

    • Has severe insulin dependent diabetes

    • Has chronic or acute renal failure or prior history of renal disease

    • Has fever (temperature > 101°F oral) at the time of surgery

    • Has a documented allergy to stainless steel, titanium, or a titanium alloy

    • Is mentally incompetent (If questionable, obtain psychiatric consult)

    • Is a prisoner

    • Is pregnant

    • Is an alcohol and/or drug abuser as defined by currently undergoing treatment for alcohol and/or drug abuse

    • Has received drugs which may interfere with bone metabolism within two weeks prior to the planned date of spinal surgery (e.g., steroids or methotrexate), excluding routine perioperative anti-inflammatory drugs

    • Has a history of endocrine or metabolic disorder known to affect osteogenesis (e.g., Paget's Disease, renal osteodystrophy, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, or osteogenesis imperfecta)

    • Has a condition that requires postoperative medications that interfere with the stability of the implant, such as steroids. (This does not include low dose aspirin for prophylactic anticoagulation), excluding routine perioperative anti-inflammatory drugs

    • Has received treatment with an investigational therapy within 28 days prior to implantation surgery or such treatment is planned during the 16 weeks following Artificial Cervical Disc-LP implantation

    • CT = computed tomography, MRI = magnetic resonance imaging

    • View popup
    Table 4

    Comparisons of efficacy and neurological variables at 84 months.

    MeasureP1 (Investigational)P0 (Control)P0 – P1Probability of Superiority
    % Investigational% ControlMean95% HPDMean95% HPDMean95% HPDNon-inferioritySuperiority
    NDI86.06% (179/208)80.11% (145/181)0.862(0.810, 0.908)0.801(0.735, 0.859)-0.061(-0.144, 0.020)∼1.0000.932
    Neurological status92.75% (192/207)79.67% (145/182)0.927(0.887, 0.959)0.800(0.737, 0.858)-0.127(-0.201, -0.055)∼1.000∼1.000
    FSU83.65% (133/159)96.85% (123/127)0.827(0.761, 0.885)0.973(0.940, 0.993)0.146(0.079, 0.217)0.0930.000
    Neck pain94.69% (196/207)95.56% (172/180)0.945(0.908, 0.972)0.961(0.928, 0.984)0.016(-0.029, 0.060)∼1.0000.234
    Arm pain94.20% (195/207)92.78% (167/180)0.945(0.908, 0.972)0.927(0.884, 0.961)-0.018(-0.072, 0.033)∼1.0000.748
    SF-36 PCS85.29% (174/204)79.21% (141/178)0.851(0.797, 0.898)0.797(0.732, 0.856)-0.053(-0.137, 0.028)∼1.0000.894
    SF-36 MCS77.45% (158/204)70.22% (125/178)0.786(0.724, 0.840)0.690(0.616, 0.758)-0.095(-0.192, 0.0001)∼1.0000.975
    Overall success (w/o FSU)74.88% (158/211)63.19% (115/182)0.746(0.683, 0.804)0.637(0.563, 0.709)-0.109(-0.208, -0.011)∼1.0000.985
    Overall success (w/FSU)62.05% (103/166)60.00% (81/135)0.612(0.533, 0.688)0.611(0.520, 0.696)-0.001(-0.125, 0.122)0.9470.508
    • FSU = functional spinal unit, HPD = highest posterior density, MCS = Short Form-36 Mental Component Summary, NDI = Neck Disability Index, SF-36 PCS = Short Form-36 Physical Component Summary.

    • View popup
    Table 5

    Patient satisfaction at 84 months.

    QuestionnaireInvestigational% (n)Control% (n)
    I am satisfied with the results of my surgery
     Definitely true79.3%(165)60.8%(110)
     Mostly true11.5%(24)24.9%(45)
     Do not know6.3%(13)6.1%(11)
     Mostly false1.0%(2)5.0%(9)
     Definitely false1.9%(4)3.3%(6)
    I was helped as much as I thought I would be
     Definitely true74.5%(155)59.9%(106)
     Mostly true14.9%(31)23.7%(42)
     Do not know4.8%(10)6.8%(12)
     Mostly false3.8%(8)4.0%(7)
     Definitely false1.9%(4)5.6%(10)
    All things considered I would have the surgery again
     Definitely true80.1%(172)72.3%(128)
     Mostly true7.7%(16)12.4%(22)
     Do not know5.8%(12)10.7%(19)
     Mostly false1.4%(3)2.3%(4)
     Definitely false1.9%(4)2.3%(4)
    • View popup
    Table 6

    Postoperative mean angular motion at adjacent levels.

    Investigational
    (N = 280)
    Control
    (N = 265)
    NMean±SDP valueNMean±SDP value
    1.5 months
     Change in angulation at the segment above (°) 266-0.77±3.61<0.001187-1.13±4.39<0.001
     Change in angulation at the segment below (°) 172-0.25±3.170.298860.70±3.670.081
    3 months
     Change in angulation at the segment above (°) 2640.32±3.850.1751940.06±4.270.841
     Change in angulation at the segment below (°) 1740.29±3.480.266911.21±3.710.002
    6 months
     Change in angulation at the segment above (°) 2630.82±3.84<0.0011980.53±4.260.084
     Change in angulation at the segment below (°) 1660.65±3.690.025940.99±3.930.017
    12 months
     Change in angulation at the segment above (°) 2671.27±3.75<0.0011881.32±4.41<0.001
     Change in angulation at the segment below (°) 1661.11±3.47<0.001951.89±4.50<0.001
    24 months
     Change in angulation at the segment above (°) 2621.88±3.84<0.0011871.04±4.600.002
     Change in angulation at the segment below (°) 1611.13±3.75<0.001941.28±4.280.005
    36 months
     Change in angulation at the segment above (°) 2251.53±3.92<0.0011390.20±5.300.639
     Change in angulation at the segment below (°) 1431.69±3.83<0.001670.74±4.520.187
    60 months
     Change in angulation at the segment above (°) 1881.37±3.99<0.001159-0.17±4.790.663
     Change in angulation at the segment below (°) 1171.11±4.370.007750.85±4.950.143
    84 months
     Change in angulation at the segment above (°) 1941.06±4.39<0.001152-0.23±5.370.604
     Change in angulation at the segment below (°) 1271.25±4.06<0.001701.25±5.070.043
    • View popup
    Table 7

    Time course summary of adverse events

    Interval*112233445566778899101011111212TotalTotal
    E†P‡EPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEP (%)
    Investigational(N = 280)
    Any adverse event 2925173801798924111724611540114631211632897218793008922271125622774271 (96.8)
    Anatomical/technical difficulty 22000000000000000011000033 (1.1)
    Cancer 001100001132004200220011126 (2.1)
    Cardiac disorders 002121002254118648711687666139 (13.9)
    Death 00000000000000000022000022 (0.7)
    Dysphagia/dysphonia 111512445543002255110000003731 (11.1)
    Gastrointestinal 218611333320131891991911231420134314064 (22.9)
    Heterotopic ossification 0022652243336655556654875244 (15.7)
    Implant events 6611222200004411114400112220 (7.1)
    Infection 11545565109141111101816652312989711761 (21.8)
    Neck and/or arm pain 3235235441704952377654492939262520372529191410483186 (66.4)
    Neurological 22141123163630242069483120251815122013231387290147 (52.5)
    Non-union 00000000110000001111000032 (0.7)
    Other 4419151412231429225640292240223825453245272517367142 (50.7)
    Other pain 4419193328483853406948483264465033523625192117486181 (64.6)
    Respiratory 0086001111811131133111310127546846 (16.4)
    Spinal event 002213251426162620523044186827161025152410139341127 (45.4)
    Trauma 006655131212122019201818171411151311999143106 (37.9)
    Urogenital 1111221186118161276148141176118351 (18.2)
    Vascular 3311111122005443445343003024 (8.6)
    Wound (non-infectious) 001410224341225422001100003423 (8.2)
    Control (N = 265)
    Any adverse event 3419119669747211941437928010434111723582256822518815353116512236232 (87.5)
    Anatomical/technical difficulty 00000000000000000000000000 (0.0)
    Cancer 00110000000011110011110055 (1.9)
    Cardiac disorders 0022112232339974545566334637 (14.0)
    Death 00000011001111002200000055 (1.9)
    Dysphagia/dysphonia 541111443300110000324400003126 (9.8)
    Gastrointestinal 747532443321122413871611128956512064 (24.2)
    Heterotopic ossification 00114122113311933885433334434 (12.8)
    Implant events 001111000022111100431100119 (3.4)
    Infection 2133552211109141010966441091187849 (18.5)
    Neck and/or arm pain 21181419154937423355444128281936242319532418342156 (58.9)
    Neurological 6524201811362417135734613542292819302411111812348144 (54.3)
    Non-union 0000334499999911002200113835 (13.2)
    Other 3214121310171310102014543126193124432731191312275123 (46.4)
    Other pain 6419161010443328255840604349344533503330241915418167 (63.0)
    Respiratory 00434211541187442210885325032 (12.1)
    Spinal event 00866530151592212331731164725301814865242106 (40.0)
    Trauma 00224412115598121015142020151415137711679 (29.8)
    Urogenital 00000011335422645311775114126 (9.8)
    Vascular 11000011001100112211110088 (3.0)
    Wound (non-infectious) 2244222211220022001111111818 (6.8)
    • ↵* Intervals: (1) Operative; (2) 1 day; (3) 1.5 months; (4) 3 months; (5) 6 months;(6) 12 months; (7) 24 months; (8) 36 months; (9) 48 months; (10) 60 months; (11) 72 months; (12) 84 months.

    • ↵† E = Number of events

    • ↵‡ P Number of patients.

    • View popup
    Table 8

    Comparisons of adverse events at 84-month interval.

    VariableP1 (Investigational)P0 (Control)P1 – P0Probability of Superiority
    Mean95% HPDMean95% HPDMean95% HPD
    Anatomical/technical difficulty0.006(0.0003, 0.019)0.000(0.000, 0.000)0.006(0.0003, 0.019)0.003
    Cancer0.023(0.008, 0.044)0.014(0.004, 0.032)0.009(-0.015, 0.033)0.224
    Cardiac disorders0.127(0.090, 0.170)0.148(0.106, 0.196)-0.021(-0.084, 0.041)0.749
    Dysphagia/dysphonia0.109(0.075, 0.150)0.098(0.064, 0.139)0.011(-0.046, 0.066)0.351
    Gastrointestinal0.228(0.179, 0.281)0.241(0.189, 0.298)-0.013(-0.092, 0.064)0.632
    Heterotopic ossification0.163(0.121, 0.210)0.122(0.084, 0.166)0.041(-0.022, 0.105)0.104
    Implant events0.074(0.045, 0.110)0.031(0.014, 0.055)0.044(0.005, 0.085)0.014
    Infection0.219(0.171, 0.272)0.183(0.137, 0.234)0.037(-0.037, 0.109)0.163
    Neck and/or arm pain0.658(0.598, 0.715)0.597(0.536, 0.657)0.061(-0.027, 0.148)0.086
    Neurological0.527(0.466, 0.587)0.542(0.478, 0.605)-0.015(-0.108, 0.077)0.624
    Non-union0.007(0.001, 0.020)0.133(0.092, 0.181)-0.126(-0.174, -0.083)∼1.000
    Other0.498(0.436, 0.560)0.474(0.412, 0.537)0.025(-0.067, 0.117)0.300
    Other pain0.636(0.575, 0.693)0.643(0.581, 0.702)-0.007(-0.096, 0.083)0.552
    Respiratory0.155(0.113, 0.202)0.125(0.088, 0.169)0.030(-0.034, 0.093)0.176
    Spinal event0.463(0.404, 0.525)0.389(0.327, 0.451)0.074(-0.015, 0.167)0.053
    Trauma0.370(0.313, 0.430)0.305(0.249, 0.364)0.065(-0.020, 0.151)0.067
    Urogenital0.173(0.129, 0.223)0.102(0.067, 0.143)0.071(0.007, 0.134)0.016
    Vascular0.084(0.053, 0.121)0.030(0.013, 0.056)0.054(0.014, 0.096)0.005
    Wound (non-infection)0.089(0.057, 0.127)0.056(0.032, 0.088)0.032(-0.013, 0.079)0.086
    Any adverse event0.968(0.943, 0.985)0.877(0.832, 0.917)0.090(0.044, 0.141)0.000
    • HPD = highest posterior density.

    • View popup
    Table 9

    Comparisons of secondary surgical events at 84 months.

    Surgical EventP1 (Investigational)P0 (Control)P1 – P0Probability of Superiority
    NMean95% HPDNMean95% HPDMean95% HPD
    Revisions10.004(0.000, 0.014)50.016(0.004, 0.036)-0.012(-0.033, 0.003)0.938
    Removal140.049(0.026, 0.079)80.030(0.013, 0.054)0.019(-0.015, 0.055)0.139
    Supplemental Fixation20.005(0.0005, 0.015)90.036(0.016 0.063)-0.030(-0.058 -0.009)0.998
    Supplemental Fixation w/o BGS20.005(0.0005, 0.015)50.019(0.006, 0.040)-0.014(-0.035 0.002)0.962
    Reoperations30.011(0.002, 0.027)40.011(0.002, 0.027)0.001(-0.018, 0.018)0.463
    Other1300.460(0.398, 0.522)1060.404(0.344, 0.466)0.056(-0.037, 0.145)0.119
    • BGS = bone growth stimulator, HPD = highest posterior density

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

International Journal of Spine Surgery
Vol. 10
1 Jan 2016
  • 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.
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with Prestige LP Disc Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Seven-Year Outcomes
(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
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with Prestige LP Disc Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Seven-Year Outcomes
Matthew F. Gornet, J. Kenneth Burkus, Mark E. Shaffrey, Hui Nian, Frank E. Harrell
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jan 2016, 10 24; DOI: 10.14444/3024

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with Prestige LP Disc Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Seven-Year Outcomes
Matthew F. Gornet, J. Kenneth Burkus, Mark E. Shaffrey, Hui Nian, Frank E. Harrell
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jan 2016, 10 24; DOI: 10.14444/3024
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Disclosures & COI
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Multilevel Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: Long-Term Outcomes at 3 and 4 Levels
  • Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: Rationale and History
  • Adjacent Segment Pathology After Treatment With Cervical Disc Arthroplasty or Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion, Part 1: Radiographic Results at 7-Year Follow-Up
  • One-Level Versus 2-Level Treatment With Cervical Disc Arthroplasty or Fusion: Outcomes Up to 7 Years
  • Long-Term Clinical Experience with Selectively Constrained SECURE-C Cervical Artificial Disc for 1-Level Cervical Disc Disease: Results from Seven-Year Follow-Up of a Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Investigational Device Exemption Clinical Trial
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Comparison of quality of life between men and women who underwent Transforaminal Percutaneous Endoscopic Discectomy for lumbar disc herniation
  • Integrated Fixation Cage Loosening Under Fatigue Loading
  • Minimally Invasive Excision of Lumbar Tophaceous Gout: Case Report
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • cervical disc arthroplasty
  • anterior cervical discectomy and fusion
  • artificial cervical disc
  • cervical radiculopathy
  • cervical myelopathy
  • adjacent level disease

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