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 ArticleFull Length Article
Open Access

Kineflex lumbar artificial disc versus Charité lumbar total disc replacement for the treatment of degenerative disc disease: A randomized non-inferiority trial with minimum of 2 years’ follow-up

Kenneth Pettine and Andrew Hersh
International Journal of Spine Surgery January 2011, 5 (4) 108-113; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esas.2011.07.003
Kenneth Pettine
aLoveland, CO
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: kpettine@spinerevolution.com
Andrew Hersh
bDavid Grant USAF Medical Centre, Travis AFB, CA
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

    Mean VAS pain scores over time (preoperatively, postoperatively, and at 6 weeks and 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months) for each group.

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

    Mean ODI scores over time (preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months) for each group.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Inclusion criteria

    Age between 18 and 60 years
    Evidence of degenerative disc disease at either L4–5 or L5-S1 (only 1 level) with radiographic evidence (CT, MRI, plain film, flexion/extension films, myelography, discography, and so on) of mild to moderate osteophyte formation of vertebral endplates, loss of disc height >2 mm when compared with adjacent level, herniated nucleus pulposus, loss of water content on MRI (black disc on T2-weighted image), or vacuum phenomenon
    History of back and/or radicular pain that is severe, ongoing, and recurrent
    At least 6 months of prior conservative therapy for discogenic back pain and/or prior nucleolysis, nucleoplasty, discectomy, or laminotomy (without accompanying facetotomy) at study treatment level
    ODI showing moderate disability
    VAS showing moderate disability
    • Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Exclusion criteria

    Any back or leg pain of unknown origin
    Foot drop
    Previous trauma to the study treatment level, resulting in compression or bursting
    Sufficient previous surgeries that would preclude use of an anterior approach or previous retroperitoneal surgery
    Other spinal surgery at affected level
    Previous thoracic or lumbar fusion
    Documented spondylolisthesis with >3 mm of slippage at study level
    Isthmic (spondylolytic) spondylolisthesis at study level
    Spondylitis (ie, inflammation of spine) at study level
    Documented significant spinal, foraminal, or lateral stenosis at study level
    Disc space height ≤3 mm at study level
    Documented presence of free nuclear fragment at study level
    Extensive facet arthritis or degeneration of facets at any level noted on MRI, CT, or radiography
    Scoliosis of lumbar spine with >11° of coronal deformity
    Metabolic bone disease
    Active systemic infection
    Active malignancy or history of metastatic malignancy
    Any terminal or autoimmune disease
    Any other disease, condition, or surgery that might impair healing
    Recent history of chemical or alcohol dependence
    Current or extended use of any drug known to interfere with bone or soft-tissue healing
    Known metal allergy
    Morbid obesity (body mass index >40 or >100 lb overweight) Transitional vertebra at level to be treated that has not clearly fused Pregnancy at time of enrollment (because this would contraindicate abdominal surgery)
    • Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Study demographics

    Kineflex DiscCharité device
    No. of subjects3331
    Male1513
    Female1818
    Age [mean (SD)] (y)40.1 (10.01)40.8 (7.68)
    Body mass index [mean (SD)]26.6 (3.39)26.0 (3.40)
    Current or former smoker17 (51.5%)20 (64.5%)
    Surgery level L4–56 (18%)4 (12.9%)
    Surgery level L5-S127 (81.8%)27 (87.1%)
    • View popup
    Table 4

    Mean improvement in VAS and ODI with time

    Kineflex mean improvementCharité mean improvementDifference (Kineflex–Charité)95% CIP value
    VAS score
     3-y change59.0568.47−9.41−27.3 to 8.5.17
     2-y change56.8054.432.37−12.5 to 17.3.004
    ODI
     3-y change40.0043.67−3.67−18.9 to 11.6.2
     2-y change37.3038.40−1.09−12.0 to 9.9.054
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

International Journal of Spine Surgery
Vol. 5, Issue 4
1 Jan 2011
  • 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.
Kineflex lumbar artificial disc versus Charité lumbar total disc replacement for the treatment of degenerative disc disease: A randomized non-inferiority trial with minimum of 2 years’ 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
Kineflex lumbar artificial disc versus Charité lumbar total disc replacement for the treatment of degenerative disc disease: A randomized non-inferiority trial with minimum of 2 years’ follow-up
Kenneth Pettine, Andrew Hersh
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jan 2011, 5 (4) 108-113; DOI: 10.1016/j.esas.2011.07.003

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Kineflex lumbar artificial disc versus Charité lumbar total disc replacement for the treatment of degenerative disc disease: A randomized non-inferiority trial with minimum of 2 years’ follow-up
Kenneth Pettine, Andrew Hersh
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jan 2011, 5 (4) 108-113; DOI: 10.1016/j.esas.2011.07.003
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

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

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Multilevel extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) and osteotomies for 3-dimensional severe deformity: 25 consecutive cases
  • Pedicle violation and Navigational errors in pedicle screw insertion using the intraoperative O-arm: A preliminary report
  • Strategy for salvage pedicle screw placement: A technical note
Show more Full Length Article

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • lumbar artificial disc replacement
  • Charite
  • Kineflex

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