{"title":"Comparison of 2-Level Versus 1-Level Total Disc Replacement: Results From a Prospective FDA-Regulated Trial","authors":"Jack E. Zigler MD , Donna D. Ohnmeiss DrMed","doi":"10.1016/S1935-9810(08)70031-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Fusion has been the traditional surgery for painful disc degeneration unresponsive to nonoperative care. Fusion rates may decline in multilevel procedures. Also, fusion may force additional stress onto adjacent discs. This effect may be amplified in multilevel procedures. Single-level total disc replacement (TDR) has been found to be as effective as fusion. There have been few published reports addressing 2-level TDR. The purpose of this study was to compare results of TDR at 2 levels to 1-level procedures.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This report included the first consecutive 86 patients who had reached 24-month follow-up from among those enrolled in the ProDisc-L investigational device exemption (IDE) study of patients undergoing TDR at 1 level (N<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->54) or at 2 levels (N<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->32). Clinical outcome measures included visual analog scales (VAS) assessing pain, Oswestry Disability Index, satisfaction measured by VAS, and responses to the question regarding whether the patient would have the same surgery again.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Operative time and length of hospitalization were significantly less in the 1-level cases compared to 2 levels (61.6<!--> <!-->min vs 97.8<!--> <!-->min; and 1.89 days vs 2.44 days; P<!--> <!--><<!--> <!-->.05). There was a trend for less blood loss in single-level cases (59.0<!--> <!-->mL vs 79.2<!--> <!-->mL) (.05<!--> <!--><;P<!--> <!--><<!--> <!-->.09). VAS and Oswestry scores were significantly improved in both groups postoperatively (by approximately 50%). At no follow-up were there significant differences in VAS, Oswestry, or patient satisfaction scores between the single- and 2-level patients. At all follow-ups, the mean satisfaction in both groups was greater than 7.5 on a scale of 0 to 10.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Patients undergoing 2-level TDR improved significantly postoperatively based on VAS and Oswestry scores, and there were no significant differences in outcome scores when comparing 1- and 2-level TDR.</p></div><div><h3>Clinical Relevance</h3><p>This study suggests that 2-level TDR can be undertaken in appropriately selected patients and achieve results similar to single-level cases.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":88695,"journal":{"name":"SAS journal","volume":"2 3","pages":"Pages 140-144"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1935-9810(08)70031-8","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SAS journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1935981008700318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Background
Fusion has been the traditional surgery for painful disc degeneration unresponsive to nonoperative care. Fusion rates may decline in multilevel procedures. Also, fusion may force additional stress onto adjacent discs. This effect may be amplified in multilevel procedures. Single-level total disc replacement (TDR) has been found to be as effective as fusion. There have been few published reports addressing 2-level TDR. The purpose of this study was to compare results of TDR at 2 levels to 1-level procedures.
Methods
This report included the first consecutive 86 patients who had reached 24-month follow-up from among those enrolled in the ProDisc-L investigational device exemption (IDE) study of patients undergoing TDR at 1 level (N = 54) or at 2 levels (N = 32). Clinical outcome measures included visual analog scales (VAS) assessing pain, Oswestry Disability Index, satisfaction measured by VAS, and responses to the question regarding whether the patient would have the same surgery again.
Results
Operative time and length of hospitalization were significantly less in the 1-level cases compared to 2 levels (61.6 min vs 97.8 min; and 1.89 days vs 2.44 days; P < .05). There was a trend for less blood loss in single-level cases (59.0 mL vs 79.2 mL) (.05 <;P < .09). VAS and Oswestry scores were significantly improved in both groups postoperatively (by approximately 50%). At no follow-up were there significant differences in VAS, Oswestry, or patient satisfaction scores between the single- and 2-level patients. At all follow-ups, the mean satisfaction in both groups was greater than 7.5 on a scale of 0 to 10.
Conclusions
Patients undergoing 2-level TDR improved significantly postoperatively based on VAS and Oswestry scores, and there were no significant differences in outcome scores when comparing 1- and 2-level TDR.
Clinical Relevance
This study suggests that 2-level TDR can be undertaken in appropriately selected patients and achieve results similar to single-level cases.
背景融合术一直是治疗对非手术治疗无反应的疼痛性椎间盘退变的传统手术。在多节段手术中融合率可能下降。同时,融合也会对相邻椎间盘施加额外的压力。这种影响在多级程序中可能会被放大。单节段全椎间盘置换术(TDR)与融合术同样有效。关于两级TDR的已发表报告很少。本研究的目的是比较2级和1级手术的TDR结果。方法本报告纳入了第一批连续随访24个月的86例患者,这些患者来自ProDisc-L研究性器械豁免(IDE)研究,接受TDR的患者在1个水平(N = 54)或2个水平(N = 32)。临床结果测量包括评估疼痛的视觉模拟量表(VAS), Oswestry残疾指数,VAS测量的满意度,以及患者是否会再次进行相同手术的问题的回答。结果1级组的手术时间和住院时间明显少于2级组(61.6 min vs 97.8 min;1.89天vs 2.44天;P & lt;. 05)。单水平病例的失血量有减少的趋势(59.0 mL vs 79.2 mL)。05 < P <.09点)。两组术后VAS和Oswestry评分均显著提高(约50%)。在没有随访的情况下,单级和2级患者在VAS、Oswestry评分或患者满意度评分上没有显著差异。在所有的随访中,两组的平均满意度在0到10的范围内都大于7.5。结论2级TDR患者术后VAS评分和Oswestry评分均有显著改善,1级TDR与2级TDR的预后评分差异无统计学意义。临床相关性本研究表明,2级TDR可以在适当选择的患者中进行,并获得与单级病例相似的结果。