An in vivo comparison study in goats for a novel motion-preserving cervical joint system

Cervical degenerative disease is one of the most common spinal disorders worldwide, especially in older people. Anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) is a useful method for the surgical treatment of multi-level cervical degenerative disease. Anterior cervical disc replacement (ACDR) is considered as an alternative surgical method. However, both methods have drawbacks, particularly the neck motion decrease observed after arthrodesis, and arthroplasty should only be performed on patients presenting with cervical disc disease but without any vertebral body disease. Therefore, we designed a non-fusion cervical joint system, namely an artificial cervical vertebra and intervertebral complex (ACVC), to provide a novel treatment for multi-level cervical degenerative disease. To enhance the long-term stability of ACVC, we applied a hydroxyapatite (HA) biocoating on the surface of the artificial joint. Thirty-two goats were randomly divided into four groups: a sham control group, an ACVC group, an ACVC-HA group, and an ACCF group (titanium and plate fixation group). We performed the prosthesis implantation in our previously established goat model. We compared the clinical, radiological, biomechanical, and histological outcomes among these four different groups for 24 weeks post surgery. The goats successfully tolerated the entire experimental procedure. The kinematics data for the ACVC and ACVC-HA groups were similar. The range of motion (ROM) in adjacent level increased after ACCF but was not altered after ACVC or ACVC-HA implantation. Compared with the control group, no significant difference was found in ROM and neutral zone (NZ) in flexion-extension or lateral bending for the ACVC and ACVC-HA groups, whereas the ROM and NZ in rotation were significantly greater. Compared with the ACCF group, the ROM and NZ significantly increased in all directions. Overall, stiffness was significantly decreased in the ACVC and ACVC-HA groups compared with the control group and the ACCF group. Similar results were found after a fatigue test of 5,000 repetitions of axial rotation. The histological results showed more new bone formation and better bone implant contact in the ACVC-HA group than the ACVC group. Goat is an excellent animal model for cervical spine biomechanical study. Compared with the intact state and the ACCF group, ACVC could provide immediate stability and preserve segmental movement after discectomy and corpectomy. Besides, HA biocoating provide a better bone ingrowth, which is essential for long-term stability. In conclusion, ACVC-HA brings new insight to treat cervical degenerative disease.

[1]  S. Burch,et al.  Graft Subsidence and Revision Rates Following Anterior Cervical Corpectomy: A Clinical Study Comparing Different Interbody Cages , 2017, Clinical spine surgery.

[2]  Samuel K. Cho,et al.  Adjacent Segment Disease Following Cervical Spine Surgery , 2013, The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

[3]  Haopeng Li,et al.  Artificial Cervical Vertebra and Intervertebral Complex Replacement through the Anterior Approach in Animal Model: A Biomechanical and In Vivo Evaluation of a Successful Goat Model , 2012, PloS one.

[4]  A. Bandyopadhyay,et al.  Antibacterial and biological characteristics of silver containing and strontium doped plasma sprayed hydroxyapatite coatings. , 2012, Acta biomaterialia.

[5]  K. Song,et al.  Efficacy of multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus corpectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a minimum 5-year follow-up study , 2012, European Spine Journal.

[6]  W. Sukovich,et al.  Adjacent-level biomechanics after single versus multilevel cervical spine fusion. , 2012, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[7]  L. Dai,et al.  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical spondylosis: a systematic review , 2012, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[8]  M. Vives,et al.  Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: Factors in Choosing the Surgical Approach , 2012, Advances in orthopedics.

[9]  P. Faris,et al.  Artificial Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review , 2011, Spine.

[10]  E. Ron,et al.  The effect of surface treatments on the adhesion of electrochemically deposited hydroxyapatite coating to titanium and on its interaction with cells and bacteria , 2011, Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine.

[11]  Daniel K. Park,et al.  Index and Adjacent Level Kinematics After Cervical Disc Replacement and Anterior Fusion: In Vivo Quantitative Radiographic Analysis , 2011, Spine.

[12]  A. Piattelli,et al.  A histomorphometric study of nanothickness and plasma-sprayed calcium-phosphorous-coated implant surfaces in rabbit bone. , 2010, The Journal of Periodontology.

[13]  Daisuke Ichihara,et al.  Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion Accelerates Adjacent Segment Degeneration: Comparison With Asymptomatic Volunteers in a Ten-Year Magnetic Resonance Imaging Follow-up Study , 2010, Spine.

[14]  T. Ryken,et al.  Cervical surgical techniques for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. , 2009, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[15]  S. Kwon,et al.  Enhanced Cell Integration to Titanium Alloy by Surface Treatment with Microarc Oxidation: A Pilot Study , 2009, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  B. Luan,et al.  Microstructural and electrochemical characterization of hydroxyapatite-coated Ti6Al4V alloy for medical implants , 2008 .

[17]  Raj D. Rao,et al.  Degenerative cervical spondylosis: clinical syndromes, pathogenesis, and management. , 2007, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[18]  Thomas R. Oxland,et al.  Biomechanical Evaluation of the Total Facet Arthroplasty System™: 3-Dimensional Kinematics , 2007, Spine.

[19]  Denis J. DiAngelo,et al.  Motion Compensation Associated With Single-Level Cervical Fusion: Where Does the Lost Motion Go? , 2006, Spine.

[20]  Haopeng Li,et al.  Biomechanical Study of Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Step-Cut Grafting With Bioabsorbable Screws Fixation in Cadaveric Cervical Spine Model , 2006, Spine.

[21]  F. Cammisa,et al.  Three-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With Plate Fixation: Radiographic and Clinical Results , 2006, Spine.

[22]  Bryan W Cunningham,et al.  Adjacent Level Intradiscal Pressure and Segmental Kinematics Following A Cervical Total Disc Arthroplasty: An In Vitro Human Cadaveric Model , 2005, Spine.

[23]  B. Cunningham Basic scientific considerations in total disc arthroplasty. , 2004, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[24]  Edward J. Goldberg,et al.  Comparison of clinical and radiographic outcome in instrumented anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with or without direct uncovertebral joint decompression. , 2004, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[25]  Yong Han,et al.  Surface modification of titanium implant by microarc oxidation and hydrothermal treatment. , 2004, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials.

[26]  Jan Goffin,et al.  Long-Term Follow-Up After Interbody Fusion of the Cervical Spine , 2004, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[27]  M. Grevitt,et al.  A Prospective Randomized Comparison of Coralline Hydroxyapatite With Autograft in Cervical Interbody Fusion , 2003, Spine.

[28]  S. Stea,et al.  Comparison among Three Different Biocoatings for Orthopaedic Prostheses. An Experimental Animal Study , 1998, The International journal of artificial organs.

[29]  L. Penning,et al.  [OPERATIVE TREATMENT OF CERVICAL SPONDYLOTIC MYELOPATHY]. , 1964, Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde.

[30]  P. Huddleston Artificial Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review , 2012 .