Abstract
The intervertebral disc prosthesis seems to have gained its place in spinal surgery. The first 45 disc replacements (36 patients) performed at our institution have been followed for 5–9 years with standard radiography, CT, MRI and clinical evaluation. Two prostheses failed and needed further surgery. The mean Oswestry Disability Index score dropped from 44% to 9% and the pain score recorded on a visual analogic scale (VAS) dropped from 8 to 1.4. 92% of patients had excellent or good results and gave a positive answer to the question “Would you be ready to sustain again this same surgical procedure?” In 4 cases, a tendency towards prosthesis subsidence was observed. With time, 6 patients showed periprosthetic calcifications. One patient developed retrograde ejaculation. In conclusion, intervertebral disc prosthesis is a well established procedure that achieves good mid-term results, but doubts still remain about the longterm outcome. Care about right indication, eventual complications and assessment of long-term results are key points for the future of this procedure.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Buttner-Janz K, Schellnack K, Zippel H, Conrad P (1988) Experience and results with the SB Charité III lumbar interverebral endoprosthesis. Z Klin Med 43:1785–1789
David T (1993) Lumbar disc prosthesis. Surgical technique, indications and clinical results in 22 patients with a minimum 12 months follow-up. Eur Spine J 1:254–259
Cinotti G, David T, Postacchini F (1996) Results of disc prosthesis after a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. Spine 21:995–1000
Lemaire JP, Skalli W, Lavaste F et al (1997) Intervertebral disc prosthesis. Results and prospects for the year 2000. Clin Orthop Relat Res 337:64–76
Zeegers WS, Bohnen LMLJ, Laaper M, Verhaegen MJA (1999) Artificial disc replacement with the modular type SB Charité III: 2 year results in 50 prospectively studied patients. Eur Spine J 8:210–217
Blumenthal S, McAfee P, Guyer RD et al (2005) A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemptions study of lumbar total disc replacement with Charité III artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part I: evaluation of clinical outcomes. Spine 14:1565–1575
McAfee P, Cunninham B, Holsapple G et al (2005) A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemptions study of lumbar total disc replacement with Charité III artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part II: evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcomes. Spine 14:1576–1583
Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Shah RV, Nanieva R et al (2005): The treatment of disabling single-level lumbar discogenic low back pain with total disc arthroplasty utilizing the Prodisc prosthesis: a prospective study with 2-year minimum follow-up. Spine 30:2230–2236
Regan, J J, McAfee P C, Blumenthal S L et al (2006) Evaluation of Surgical Volume and the Early Experience With Lumbar Total Disc Replacement as Part of the Investigational Device Exemption Study of the Charite Artificial Disc. Spine. 31:2270–2276
Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB (2000) The Oswestry disability index. Spine 25:2940–2952
Fairbank JCT, Couper J, Davies JB (1980) The Oswestry low back pain questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66:271–273
McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Devine J et al (2003) Classification of heterotopic ossification (HO) in artificial disk replacement. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:384–389
Watkins RG (1983) Surgical approach to the spine. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
Gioia G, Mandelli D, Randelli F (2000) L’approccio anteriore retroperitoneale al rachide lombosacrale. G Ital Orthop Traum 26:135–142
Putzier M, Funk J, Schneider SV et al (2006) Charité total disc replacement — clinical and radiographical results after an average follow-up of 17 years. Eur Spine J 15:183–195
Tortolani PJ, McAfee PC, Cunningham BW et al (2007) Prevalence of heterotopic ossification following total disc replacement: a prospective, randomized study of two hundred and seventy-six patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:82–88
Sasso RC, Kenneth Burkus J, LeHuec JC (2004) Retrograde ejaculation after anterior lumbar interbody fusion: transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal exposure. Spine 29:106–107
David T (2007) Long-term results of one-level lumbar arthroplasty: minimum 10-year follow-up of the Charite Artificial Disc in 106 patients. Spine 32:661–666
Tropiano P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, Marnay T (2003) Lumbar disc replacement: preliminary results with Pro Disc II after a minimum follow-up period of 1 year. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:362–368
Siepe CJ, Mayer HM, Wiechert K, Korge A (2006) Clinical results of total lumbar disc replacement with ProDisc II: three-year results for different indications. Spine 31:1923–1932
Vernon-Roberts B, Pirie CJ (1977) Degenerative changes in the intervertebral disc and and their sequelae. Rheum Rehab 16:13–21
Schulte TL, Bullmann V, Lerner T et al (2005) Lumbar disc arthroplasty. Established technique or experimental procedure? Orthopäde 34:801–813
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gioia, G., Mandelli, D. & Randelli, F. The Charité III Artificial Disc lumbar disc prosthesis: assessment of medium-term results. J Orthopaed Traumatol 8, 134–139 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-007-0080-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-007-0080-1