In Vivo Evaluation of Dynamic Characteristics of the Normal, Fused, and Disc Replacement Cervical Spines

Study Design. In vivo human and biomechanical study. Objective. To quantify the in vivo kinematic and kinetic variations in the normal, fused, and disc replacement cervical spines. Summary of Background Data. Clinical and cadaveric studies have reported the motions and forces after an anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) or implantation of a cervical artificial disc replacement (CADR). However, there is no current study that describes the in vivo dynamic data of these 2 groups and compares them with that of a normal group. Methods. Ten normal subjects, 10 patients treated with an ACDF (C5–C6), and 10 patients having CADR (C5–C6) performed full flexion to extension motions under fluoroscopic surveillance. Kinematic data were obtained from the fluoroscopic images. Kinetic data were derived based on an inverse dynamic model of the entire cervical spine. Results. Even though the range of motion was larger for the normal group than for the ACDF group, the intersegmental rotations at the adjacent C6–C7 and C4–C5 levels in the ACDF group were 13.4° and 8.8° compared with 3.7° and 4.8° in the normal group, respectively, during the neck motion from 20° flexion to 15° extension. The difference at the C3–C4 level was 1° on average. Both the transverse contact forces and the soft tissue forces in the ACDF group were significantly larger than those in the normal group. The vertical forces in the ACDF group were smaller than those in the normal group, but there were no statistical differences. The CADR group exhibited kinematic and kinetic results similar to the normal group. Conclusion. In terms of restoring the normal dynamic motion of the cervical spine, CADR may be an alternative to the ACDF.

[1]  L. Penning.  Normal movements of the cervical spine. , 1978, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[2]  S. Sepic,et al.  Anterior Discectomy and Fusion for Painful Cervical Disc Disease: A Report of 50 Patients With an Average Follow‐up of 21 Years , 1998, Spine.

[3]  P. Cooper,et al.  Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: patterns of neurological deficit and recovery after anterior cervical decompression. , 1999, Neurosurgery.

[4]  S. Larsson,et al.  Three-Dimensional Analysis of Neck Motion: A Clinical Method , 1990, Spine.

[5]  R. Robinson,et al.  The treatment of certain cervical-spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion. , 1958, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  E M Braunstein,et al.  Radiographic Changes Following Anterior Cervical Fusion , 1980, Spine.

[7]  K. Thuomas,et al.  Degenerative Changes following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Evaluated by Fast Spin-Echo MR Imaging , 1996, Acta radiologica.

[8]  F. Netter,et al.  Netter's atlas of human anatomy for CPT coding , 2005 .

[9]  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.

[10]  D T Davy,et al.  A Kinematic Study of the Cervical Spine Before and After Segmental Arthrodesis , 1998, Spine.

[11]  N. Theodore,et al.  Adjacent level degeneration after anterior cervical fusion: a clinical review. , 2005, Neurosurgery clinics of North America.

[12]  A. Hilibrand,et al.  The Success of Anterior Cervical Arthrodesis Adjacent to a Previous Fusion , 1997, Spine.

[13]  W. Edwards,et al.  Cervical flexion, extension, protrusion, and retraction. A radiographic segmental analysis. , 1999, Spine.

[14]  P. Fransson,et al.  Primary and Coupled Cervical Movements: The Effect of Age, Gender, and Body Mass Index. A 3-Dimensional Movement Analysis of a Population Without Symptoms of Neck Disorders , 2006, Spine.

[15]  Bhalla Sk,et al.  Normal ranges of intervertebral-joint motion of the cervical spine. , 1969 .

[16]  Jan Goffin,et al.  Intermediate Follow-up After Treatment of Degenerative Disc Disease With the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis: Single-Level and Bi-Level , 2003, Spine.

[17]  Melinda Miller Holt,et al.  Statistics and Data Analysis From Elementary to Intermediate , 2001, Technometrics.

[18]  S. Sepic,et al.  Roentgenographic findings following anterior cervical fusion , 2004, Skeletal Radiology.

[19]  A. Hilibrand,et al.  Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. , 1999, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[20]  T. Albert,et al.  Assessing the potential impact of total disc arthroplasty on surgeon practice patterns in North America. , 2004, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[21]  Christian M. Puttlitz,et al.  Intervertebral Disc Replacement Maintains Cervical Spine Kinetics , 2004, Spine.

[22]  M M Panjabi,et al.  Functional Radiographic Diagnosis of the Cervical Spine: Flexion/Extension , 1988, Spine.

[23]  S. L. Griffith,et al.  Intradiscal Pressure Measurements Above an Instrumented Fusion: A Cadaveric Study , 1995, Spine.

[24]  Tae-Hong Lim,et al.  Biomechanical Study on the Effect of Cervical Spine Fusion on Adjacent-Level Intradiscal Pressure and Segmental Motion , 2002, Spine.

[25]  E H Simmons,et al.  Normal ranges of intervertebral-joint motion of the cervical spine. , 1969, Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie.

[26]  T A Zdeblick,et al.  Modified Smith-Robinson Procedure for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion , 1992, Spine.

[27]  S. Emery,et al.  Robinson anterior cervical discectomy and arthrodesis for cervical radiculopathy. Long-term follow-up of one hundred and twenty-two patients. , 1993, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[28]  Mohamed Mahfouz,et al.  Knee mechanics: a review of past and present techniques to determine in vivo loads. , 2005, Journal of biomechanics.

[29]  G. Pickett,et al.  Kinematic Analysis of the Cervical Spine Following Implantation of an Artificial Cervical Disc , 2005, Spine.

[30]  Andrew Holmes,et al.  The Range and Nature of Flexion‐Extension Motion in the Cervical Spine , 1994, Spine.

[31]  A. Nordwall,et al.  Normal range of motion of the cervical spine. , 1989, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.