The Bryan Cervical Disc: wear properties and early clinical results.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT The rationale for motion preservation by disc replacement after anterior cervical discectomy is to diminish long-term morbidity secondary to adjacent segment degeneration. However, these disc prostheses will be subject to wear and its possible adverse consequences. PURPOSE Assess the in vitro and in vivo wear properties of the Bryan Cervical Disc and the early clinical results. STUDY DESIGN In vitro mechanical testing, caprine animal model and prospective European human trial. OUTCOME MEASURE In vitro mechanical testing used American Society for Testing and Materials standards to measure wear rates and debris. Caprine results were analyzed by histopathologic analysis by a blinded veterinary pathologist. Clinical outcomes were measured by Odoms's criteria, independent radiologic analysis and Short Form-36. METHODS In vitro wear testing in cervical spine simulator for up to 40 M cycles. Wear rates were determined and particles analyzed microscopically. The in vivo inflammatory response was studied in goats that had discectomy at C4-C5. They were sacrificed between 3 and 12 months and histopathologically were compared with controls who had fusions with titanium plates. A prospective clinical trial of 136 patients with minimum 1-year follow-up was analyzed using validated questionnaires and radiographs. RESULTS In vitro wear averaged approximately 1.76% by weight at 10 M cycles and 18% at 40 M cycles. Wear debris were present in the periprosthetic tissues in 4 of 11 animals without inflammatory response. The early clinical results were satisfactory in over 90% of patients. CONCLUSION The in vivo and in vitro wear properties are satisfactory for the expected duration of life of the prosthesis. The early clinical results are satisfactory and equal to fusion.

[1]  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.

[2]  S. Goodman,et al.  The effects of bulk versus particulate titanium and cobalt chrome alloy implanted into the rabbit tibia. , 1990, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[3]  A. Pennings,et al.  Use of porous polyurethanes for meniscal reconstruction and meniscal prostheses. , 1996, Biomaterials.

[4]  R. Brooks,et al.  The effects of the concentration of high-density polyethylene particles on the bone-implant interface. , 2000, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[5]  D. Baker,et al.  In vivo inflammatory response to polymethylmethacrylate particulate debris: Effect of size, morphology, and surface area , 1994, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[6]  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.

[7]  M Honl,et al.  Determination of the in vivo loading of the lumbar spine with a new approach directly at the workplace--first results for nurses. , 2000, Clinical biomechanics.

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

[9]  W. Maloney,et al.  Cellular profile and cytokine production at prosthetic interfaces. Study of tissues retrieved from revised hip and knee replacements. , 1998, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[10]  T. Albert,et al.  Donor Site Morbidity After Anterior Iliac Crest Bone Harvest for Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion , 2003, Spine.

[11]  P. Campbell,et al.  Positive cytokine production in failed metal-on-metal total hip replacements , 2002, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[12]  P. Millett,et al.  The effects of particulate cobalt, chromium and cobalt-chromium alloy on human osteoblast-like cells in vitro. , 1997, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[13]  Jan Goffin,et al.  Preliminary clinical experience with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis , 2002 .

[14]  S. Goodman,et al.  Effect of size, concentration, surface area, and volume of polymethylmethacrylate particles on human macrophages in vitro. , 1996, Journal of biomedical materials research.

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

[16]  J H Skotte,et al.  Estimation of low back loading on nurses during patient handling tasks: the importance of bedside reaction force measurement. , 2001, Journal of biomechanics.

[17]  T. Albert,et al.  Physical and monetary costs associated with autogenous bone graft harvesting. , 2003, American journal of orthopedics.

[18]  D J Wheatley,et al.  In vitro function and durability assessment of a novel polyurethane heart valve prosthesis. , 1996, Artificial organs.

[19]  G. Odom,et al.  Cervical disk lesions. , 1958, Journal of the American Medical Association.

[20]  F. Calenbergh,et al.  Long-term results after anterior cervical fusion and osteosynthetic stabilization for fractures and/or dislocations of the cervical spine. , 1995, Journal of spinal disorders.

[21]  S. Goodman,et al.  In vitro, in vivo, and tissue retrieval studies on particulate debris. , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[22]  A. Seifalian,et al.  New Prostheses for Use in Bypass Grafts with Special Emphasis on Polyurethanes , 2002, Cardiovascular surgery.

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

[24]  P. Campbell,et al.  Mechanism of failure in hips with an uncemented, all polyethylene socket. , 1999, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.