The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2007;89:82-88.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.00432
© 2007 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow CME: Take the activities for this article:
 Spine Test 11: Spring 2007 (publication date May 15, 2007; expiration date ...
CME 1: January, February, March 2007 (publication date April 5, 2007; expir...
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tortolani, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Adams, K. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tortolani, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Adams, K. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Spine
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Prevalence of Heterotopic Ossification Following Total Disc Replacement

A Prospective, Randomized Study of Two Hundred and Seventy-six Patients

P. Justin Tortolani, MD1, Bryan W. Cunningham2, MMech Eng2, Paul C. McAfee, MD1, Gwen A. Holsapple, BS2 and Karen A. Adams, BS2

1 Scoliosis and Spine Center of Maryland, O'Dea Medical Arts Building, 7506 Osler Drive, Suite 104, Baltimore, MD 21204
2 Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, Union Memorial Hospital, 201 East University Parkway, Suite 781, Baltimore, MD 21218

Investigation performed at Scoliosis and Spine Center of Maryland, St. Joseph Medical Center, and the Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland

Disclosure: In support of their research for or preparation of this manuscript, one or more of the authors received grants or outside funding from DePuy Spine. In addition, one or more of the authors received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity (DePuy Spine). Also, a commercial entity (DePuy Spine and the Orthopedic Spinal Research Fund) paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, benefits to a research fund, foundation, educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors are affiliated or associated.

Background: Despite reports of good clinical outcomes in patients treated with lumbar and cervical disc replacements, varying degrees of heterotopic bone have been observed around these devices. The purposes of the present study were to determine the prevalence of heterotopic ossification following lumbar disc replacement and to investigate whether heterotopic ossification results in loss of motion or negatively affects clinical outcome.

Methods: All preoperative and postoperative radiographs from a completed prospective, randomized, United States Food and Drug Administration-regulated trial comparing replacement with the CHARITÉ Artificial Disc with anterior interbody arthrodesis were analyzed. In each of 276 patients treated with disc replacement, heterotopic ossification was categorized with use of a validated 5-point radiographic classification system both preoperatively and at all protocol-specified follow-up intervals to two years. The range of motion on flexion and extension radiographs made preoperatively was compared with that on radiographs made two years postoperatively, and the motion was correlated with the presence or absence of heterotopic ossification. Similarly, validated clinical outcome measures were correlated with the presence or absence of heterotopic ossification at two years.

Results: The prevalence of heterotopic ossification in the 276 consecutive patients treated with lumbar disc replacement with the CHARITÉ Artificial Disc was 4.3%. There were four cases of Class-I heterotopic ossification and eight cases of Class-II heterotopic ossification. In five of the twelve patients, heterotopic bone was visible as early as six weeks postoperatively, and eleven of the twelve patients had evidence of heterotopic ossification by three months postoperatively. The postoperative range of motion exceeded the preoperative range in all of the patients with heterotopic ossification. With the numbers available, no difference in either the range of motion or the clinical outcome at twenty-four months postoperatively was found between the patients who had and those who did not have heterotopic ossification.

Conclusions: Heterotopic ossification is infrequent in patients treated with the CHARITÉ Artificial Disc, and it does not impact the range of motion or clinical outcome.

Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?