TY - JOUR
T1 - Results of the prospective, randomized, multicenter food and drug administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc®-L total disc replacement versus circumferential fusion for the treatment of 1-level degenerative disc disease
AU - Zigler, Jack
AU - Delamarter, Rick
AU - Spivak, Jeffrey M.
AU - Linovitz, Raymond J.
AU - Danielson, Guy O.
AU - Haider, Thomas T.
AU - Cammisa, Frank
AU - Zuchermann, Jim
AU - Balderston, Richard
AU - Kitchel, Scott
AU - Foley, Kevin
AU - Watkins, Robert
AU - Bradford, David
AU - Yue, James
AU - Yuan, Hansen
AU - Herkowitz, Harry
AU - Geiger, Doug
AU - Bendo, John
AU - Peppers, Timothy
AU - Sachs, Barton
AU - Girardi, Federico
AU - Kropf, Michael
AU - Goldstein, Jeff
PY - 2007/5
Y1 - 2007/5
N2 - STUDY DESIGN. A prospective, randomized, multicenter, Food and Drug Administration-regulated Investigational Device Exemption clinical trial. OBJECTIVE. To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the ProDisc®-L (Synthes Spine, West Chester, PA) lumbar total disc replacement compared to circumferential spinal fusion for the treatment of discogenic pain at 1 vertebral level between L3 and S1. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. As part of the Investigational Device Exemption clinical trial, favorable single center results of lumbar total disc replacement with the ProDisc®-L have been reported previously. METHODS. Two hundred eighty-six (286) patients were treated on protocol. Patients were evaluated before and after surgery, at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Evaluation at each visit included patient self-assessments, physical and neurologic examinations, and radiographic evaluation. RESULTS. Safety of ProDisc®-L implantation was demonstrated with 0% major complications. At 24 months, 91.8% of investigational and 84.5% of control patients reported improvement in the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]) from preoperative levels, and 77.2% of investigational and 64.8% of control patients met the ≥15% Oswestry Disability Index improvement criteria. Overall neurologic success in the investigational group was superior to the control group (91.2% investigational and 81.4% control; P = 0.0341). At 6 weeks and 3 months follow-up time points, the ProDisc®-L patients recorded SF-36 Health Survey scores significantly higher than the control group (P = 0.018, P = 0.0036, respectively). The visual analog scale pain assessment showed statistically significant improvement from preoperative levels regardless of treatment (P < 0.0001). Visual analog scale patient satisfaction at 24 months showed a statistically significant difference favoring investigational patients over the control group (P = 0.015). Radiographic range of motion was maintained within a normal functional range in 93.7% of investigational patients and averaged 7.7°. CONCLUSIONS. ProDisc®-L has been found to be safe and efficacious. In properly chosen patients, ProDisc®-L has been shown to be superior to circumferential fusion by multiple clinical criteria.
AB - STUDY DESIGN. A prospective, randomized, multicenter, Food and Drug Administration-regulated Investigational Device Exemption clinical trial. OBJECTIVE. To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the ProDisc®-L (Synthes Spine, West Chester, PA) lumbar total disc replacement compared to circumferential spinal fusion for the treatment of discogenic pain at 1 vertebral level between L3 and S1. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. As part of the Investigational Device Exemption clinical trial, favorable single center results of lumbar total disc replacement with the ProDisc®-L have been reported previously. METHODS. Two hundred eighty-six (286) patients were treated on protocol. Patients were evaluated before and after surgery, at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Evaluation at each visit included patient self-assessments, physical and neurologic examinations, and radiographic evaluation. RESULTS. Safety of ProDisc®-L implantation was demonstrated with 0% major complications. At 24 months, 91.8% of investigational and 84.5% of control patients reported improvement in the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]) from preoperative levels, and 77.2% of investigational and 64.8% of control patients met the ≥15% Oswestry Disability Index improvement criteria. Overall neurologic success in the investigational group was superior to the control group (91.2% investigational and 81.4% control; P = 0.0341). At 6 weeks and 3 months follow-up time points, the ProDisc®-L patients recorded SF-36 Health Survey scores significantly higher than the control group (P = 0.018, P = 0.0036, respectively). The visual analog scale pain assessment showed statistically significant improvement from preoperative levels regardless of treatment (P < 0.0001). Visual analog scale patient satisfaction at 24 months showed a statistically significant difference favoring investigational patients over the control group (P = 0.015). Radiographic range of motion was maintained within a normal functional range in 93.7% of investigational patients and averaged 7.7°. CONCLUSIONS. ProDisc®-L has been found to be safe and efficacious. In properly chosen patients, ProDisc®-L has been shown to be superior to circumferential fusion by multiple clinical criteria.
KW - Artificial disc
KW - Circumferential fusion
KW - Investigational Device Exemption clinical trial/
KW - Lumbar spine
KW - ProDisc®-L
KW - Randomized study
KW - Total disc replacement
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34248399204&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318054e377
DO - 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318054e377
M3 - Article
C2 - 17495770
AN - SCOPUS:34248399204
SN - 0362-2436
VL - 32
SP - 1155
EP - 1162
JO - Spine
JF - Spine
IS - 11
ER -