Sagittal Balance Parameters after Anterior Cervical Discectomy with Spondylodesis and Arthroplasty Using Endocarbon Endoprosthesis: Results of Randomized Study

The aim of the study was to examine the effect of cervical segment mobility on spinal sagittal balance parameters after cervical total disc arthroplasty (CTDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using the first domestic intervertebral disc endoprosthesis.

Materials and Methods. The randomized prospective study included 98 patients (48 with CTDA, 50 with ACDF). Implants used: intervertebral disc endoprosthesis or intervertebral fusion cage (Endocarbon; NPP “MedInzh”, Russia).

Total cervical mobility and range of motion in the target and adjacent vertebral motion segments were studied by functional radiography before surgery, at an early postoperative period (within 3 days), and 3, 6, and 12 months after the intervention.

Values of cervical lordosis (CL, °), cervical sagittal vertical alignment (cSVA, mm), and first thoracic vertebra slope (T1 slope, °) were determined by using spinal radiography. Surgimap V2.2 software (Nemaris, USA) was used for measurements.

Results. When comparing changes of overall cervical mobility at different time intervals, statistically significant differences were obtained in ACDF group (p=0.001). When comparing this parameter between ACDF and CTDA, a statistically significant difference was found only at the early postoperative period (p=0.004).

In CTDA group, the range of motion increased at the operated segment (p=0.001) and decreased at the caudal segment (p=0.002). In ACDF group, no motion was observed at the operated segment (p=0.001) and the range of motion increased at adjacent segments (p=0.001). A statistically significant difference between ACDF and CTDA was obtained only at the operated (p=0.001) and caudal segments (p≤0.002).

Correlation analysis showed no dependence between range of motion influence and regional/global balance values (p>0.5).

The intergroup comparison of cervical lordosis (CL) values revealed a statistically significant difference after 6 (p=0.001) and 12 (p=0.001) months. The best results were obtained at ACDF group towards lordosis increase (p=0.001). The relationship between cervical lordosis and arthroplasty of segments C5–C6, C6–C7 (p=0.003; ρ=0.41) was determined using correlation analysis. The correlation between CL and ACDF (p=0.001; ρ=0.72) was also established.

cSVA comparison between groups showed no difference at preoperative period (p=0.215), 6 (p=0.20) and 12 (p=0.425) months after surgery. cSVAs at both groups were equally close to normal values.

T1 slope changes before and 12 months after surgery were statistically significant at ACDF (p=0.008) and CTDA (p=0.001) groups. T1 slope values comparison between ACDF and CTDA shows statistically significant difference after 12 months (p=0.003). T1 slopes were equally close to normal values 1 year after surgical treatment.

Conclusion. Over a 12-month observation period, the segmental range of motion was found to have no effect on changes of regional and global balance of the cervical spine. No influence was confirmed of range of motion on adjacent level syndrome development — the syndrome was diagnosed in none of the cases.

This study demonstrated the effectiveness of arthroplasty using an Endocarbon endoprosthesis in improving cSVA and T1 slope values, but no significant improvement of CL values after treatment compared to ACDF group.

1. Yang P., Li Y., Li J., Shen Y. Impact of T1 slope on surgical and adjacent segment degeneration after Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2017; 13: 1119–1125, https://doi.org/10.2147/tcrm.s138990.
2. Coric D., Guyer R.D., Nunley P.D., Musante D., Carmody C., Gordon C., Lauryssen C., Boltes M.O., Ohnmeiss D.D. Prospective, randomized multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: 5-year results with a metal-on-metal artificial disc. J Neurosurg Spine 2018; 28(3): 252–261, https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.5.spine16824.
3. Phillips F.M., Geisler F.H., Gilder K.M., Reah C., Howell K.M., McAfee P.C. Long-term outcomes of the US FDA IDE prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015; 40(10): 674–683, https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000000869.
4. Gandhi A.A., Kode S., DeVries N.A., Grosland N.M., Smucker J.D., Fredericks D.C. Biomechanical analysis of cervical disc replacement and fusion using single level, two level, and hybrid constructs. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015; 40(20): 1578–1585, https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000001044.
5. Lin Q., Zhou X., Wang X., Cao P., Tsai N., Yuan W. A comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and corpectomy in patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2012; 21(3): 474–481, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-1961-9.
6. Du W., Wang L., Shen Y., Zhang Y., Ding W., Ren L. Long-term impacts of different posterior operations on curvature, neurological recovery and axial symptoms for multilevel cervical degenerative myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2013; 22(7): 1594–1602, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2741-5.
7. Mudrov V.A. Algorithms for performing data correlation analysis in biomedical research using the SPSS software package. Zabajkal’skij medicinskij vestnik 2020; 2: 169–176, https://doi.org/10.52485/19986173_2020_2_169.
8. Bavrina A.P. Modern rules for the use of parametric and nonparametric tools in the statistical analysis of biomedical data. Medicinskij al’manah 2021; 1: 64–73.
9. Sawa A.G.U., de Andrada Pereira B., Rodriguez-Martinez N.G., Reyes P.M., Kelly B.P., Crawford N.R. In vitro biomechanics of human cadaveric cervical spines with mature fusion. Int J Spine Surg 2021; 15(5): 890–898, https://doi.org/10.14444/8114.
10. Zharnov A.M., Zharnova O.A. Biomechnical processes in the intervertebral cervical disk of the spine at its motion. Rossijskij zurnal biomehaniki 2013; 17(1): 32–40.
11. Roberts S., Evans H., Trivedi J., Menage J. Histology and pathology of the human intervertebral disc. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88(Suppl 2): 10–14, https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.f.00019.
12. Gushcha A.O., Yusupova A.R. Modern concepts of intervertebral disc degeneration. Voprosy neirokhirurgii imeni N.N. Burdenko 2020; 84(6): 112–117, https://doi.org/10.17116/neiro202084061112.
13. Shriver M.F., Lewis D.J., Kshettry V.R., Rosenbaum B.P., Benzel E.C., Mroz T.E. Pseudoarthrosis rates in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a meta-analysis. Spine J 2015; 15(9): 2016–2027, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2015.05.010.
14. Kim S.W., Limson M.A., Kim S.B., Arbatin J.J.F., Chang K.Y., Park M.S., Shin J.H., Ju Y.S. Comparison of radiographic changes after ACDF versus Bryan disc arthroplasty in single and bi-level cases. Eur Spine J 2009; 18(2): 218–231, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-008-0854-z.
15. Byvaltsev V.A., Stepanov I.A., Kalinin A.A., Aliyev M.A., Aglakov B.M., Yusupov B.R., Shepelev V.V. Total arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy with fixation: long-term results of a randomized clinical trial. Hirurgia pozvonocnika 2019; 16(1): 48–56, https://doi.org/10.14531/ss2019.1.48-56.
16. Staub B.N., Lafage R., Kim H.J., Shaffrey C.I., Mundis G.M., Hostin R., Burton D., Lenke L., Gupta M.C., Ames C., Klineberg E., Bess S., Shwab F., Lafage V.; International Spine Study Group. Cervical mismatch: the normative value of T1 slope minus cervical lordosis and its ability to predict ideal cervical lordosis. J Neurosurg Spine 2018; 30(1): 31–37, https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.5.spine171232.
17. Hyun S.J., Kim K.J., Jahng T.A., Kim H.J. Relationship between T1 slope and cervical alignment following multilevel posterior cervical fusion surgery: impact of T1 slope minus cervical lordosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016; 41(7): E396–E402, https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000001264.
18. Safavi-Abbasi S., Reyes P.M., Abjornson C., Crawford N.R. Feasibility and biomechanics of multilevel arthroplasty and combined cervical arthrodesis and arthroplasty. Clin Spine Surg 2016; 29(10): E522–E531, https://doi.org/10.1097/bsd.0b013e31829920f0.
19. Smith J.S., Klineberg E., Schwab F., Shaffrey C.I., Moal B., Ames C.P., Hostin R., Fu K.M.G., Burton D., Akbarnia B., Gupta M., Hart R., Bess S., Lafage V.; International Spine Study Group. Change in classification grade by the SRS-Schwab Adult Spinal Deformity Classification predicts impact on health-related quality of life measures: prospective analysis of operative and nonoperative treatment. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013; 38(19): 1663–1671, https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0b013e31829ec563.

Eliseev A.S., Bokov A.E., Mlyavykh S.G. Sagittal Balance Parameters after Anterior Cervical Discectomy with Spondylodesis and Arthroplasty Using Endocarbon Endoprosthesis: Results of Randomized Study. Sovremennye tehnologii v medicine 2022; 14(4): 50, https://doi.org/10.17691/stm2022.14.4.06