Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cervical Total Disc Replacement: Biomechanics

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Spine Technology

Abstract

Cervical disc arthroplasty is an evolving surgical concept designed to treat certain pathological conditions of the cervical spine. The introduction of arthroplasty devices has stimulated novel studies aimed at understanding motion in the cervical spine and has also driven investigators to examine the consequences that result from surgical alteration of pathological structures. The study of cervical “biomechanics” and “kinematics” has evolved from basic analysis of flexion/extension radiographs to complex, computer-assisted modeling that aides investigators in understanding concepts such as center of rotation (COR), functional spinal unit (FSU) translation, and coupled motion. In recent years kinematic studies have contributed to our understanding of adjacent level degeneration and index-level facet loading. We review the young science of cervical arthroplasty biomechanics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ahn HS, DiAngelo DJ (2008) A biomechanical study of artificial cervical discs using computer simulation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33(8):883–892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohlman HH et al (1993) Robinson anterior cervical discectomy and arthrodesis for cervical radiculopathy. Long-term follow-up of one hundred and twenty-two patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75(9):1298–1307

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell MJ et al (2009) Use of cervical collar after single-level anterior cervical fusion with plate: is it necessary? Spine 34(1):43–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chang UK et al (2007a) Range of motion change after cervical arthroplasty with ProDisc-C and prestige artificial discs compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 7(1):40–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chang UK et al (2007b) Changes in adjacent-level disc pressure and facet joint force after cervical arthroplasty compared with cervical discectomy and fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 7(1):33–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins BH, Robertson JT, Gill SS (1998) Surgical experience with an implanted artificial cervical joint. J Neurosurg 88(6):943–948. [see comment]

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DiAngelo DJ et al (2003) Biomechanical testing of an artificial cervical joint and an anterior cervical plate. J Spinal Disord Tech 16(4):314–323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DiAngelo DJ et al (2004) In vitro biomechanics of cervical disc arthroplasty with the ProDisc-C total disc implant. Neurosurg Focus 17(3):E7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dmitriev AE et al (2005) Adjacent level intradiscal pressure and segmental kinematics following a cervical total disc arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30(10):1165–1172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eck JC et al (2002) Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion. Spine 27(22):2431–2434

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller DA et al (1998) A kinematic study of the cervical spine before and after segmental arthrodesis. Spine 23(15):1649–1656

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Galbusera F et al (2006) Biomechanics of the C5-C6 spinal unit before and after placement of a disc prosthesis. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 5(4):253–261

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Galbusera F et al (2008) Cervical spine biomechanics following implantation of a disc prosthesis. Med Eng Phys 30(9):1127–1133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goffin J et al (1995) Long-term results after anterior cervical fusion and osteosynthetic stabilization for fractures and/or dislocations of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord 8(6):500–508; discussion 499

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goffin J et al (2004) Long-term follow-up after interbody fusion of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord Tech 17(2):79–85

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heidecke V et al (2008) Intervertebral disc replacement for cervical degenerative disease – clinical results and functional outcome at two years in patients implanted with the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis. Acta Neurochir 150(5):453–459

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heller JG et al (2009) Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Spine 34(2):101–107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hilibrand AS et al (1999) Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg (Am Vol) 81(4):519–528

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hu N et al (2006) Porous coated motion cervical disc replacement: a biomechanical, histomorphometric, and biologic wear analysis in a caprine model. Spine 31(15):1666–1673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kallemeyn NA et al (2009) An interactive multiblock approach to meshing the spine. Comput Methods Prog Biomed 95(3):227–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung C et al (2005) Clinical significance of heterotopic ossification in cervical disc replacement: a prospective multicenter clinical trial. Neurosurgery 57(4):759–763

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lin CY et al (2009) Stress analysis of the interface between cervical vertebrae end plates and the Bryan, Prestige LP, and ProDisc-C cervical disc prostheses: an in vivo image-based finite element study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34(15):1554–1560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu F et al (2007) In vivo evaluation of dynamic characteristics of the normal, fused, and disc replacement cervical spines. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(23):2578–2584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAfee PC et al (2003) Cervical disc replacement-porous coated motion prosthesis: a comparative biomechanical analysis showing the key role of the posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine 28(20):S176–S185

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mehren C et al (2006) Heterotopic ossification in total cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine 31(24):2802–2806

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pickett GE, Rouleau JP, Duggal N (2005) Kinematic analysis of the cervical spine following implantation of an artificial cervical disc. Spine 30(17):1949–1954

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Puttlitz CM et al (2004) Intervertebral disc replacement maintains cervical spine kinetics. Spine 29(24):2809–2814

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson JT, Papadopoulos SM, Traynelis VC (2005) Assessment of adjacent-segment disease in patients treated with cervical fusion or arthroplasty: a prospective 2-year study. J Neurosurg Spine 3(6):417–423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau MA et al (2008) In vivo kinematics of two types of ball-and-socket cervical disc replacements in the sagittal plane: cranial versus caudal geometric center. Spine Phila Pa 1976 33(1):E6–E9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sasso RC, Best NM (2008) Cervical kinematics after fusion and Bryan disc arthroplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech 21(1):19–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sasso RC et al (2007a) Artificial disc versus fusion: a prospective, randomized study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients. Spine 32(26):2933–2940

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sasso RC et al (2007b) Clinical outcomes of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial with 24-month follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 20(7):481–491

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sasso RC et al (2008) Motion analysis of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior discectomy and fusion: results from a prospective, randomized, multicenter, clinical trial. J Spinal Disord Tech 21(6):393–399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sasso WR et al (2017) Long-term clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42(4):209–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silber JS et al (2003) Donor site morbidity after anterior iliac crest bone harvest for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine 28(2):134–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • St. John TA et al (2003) Physical and monetary costs associated with autogenous bone graft harvesting. Am J Orthop (Chatham, Nj) 32(1):18–23

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indiana Spine Group, Carmel, IN, USA

    Joseph D. Smucker & Rick C. Sasso

Authors
  1. Joseph D. Smucker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rick C. Sasso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph D. Smucker .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Allegheny General Hospital Department of Neurosurgery, Mars, PA, USA

    Boyle Cheng

Section Editor information

  1. Department of Neurological Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center and Carolina Neurosurgery and Spine Associates, Charlotte, NC, USA

    Domagoj Coric MD

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Smucker, J.D., Sasso, R.C. (2019). Cervical Total Disc Replacement: Biomechanics. In: Cheng, B. (eds) Handbook of Spine Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33037-2_74-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33037-2_74-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-33037-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-33037-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Biomedicine and Life SciencesReference Module Biomedical and Life Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation