The M6-C Cervical Disk Prosthesis: First Clinical Experience in 33 Patients. Issue 4 (May 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Thomas, Sam; Willems, Karel; Van den Daelen, Luc; Linden, Patrick; Ciocci, Maria-Cristina; Bocher, Philippe
• Is Part Of: Clinical spine surgery. Volume 29:Issue 4(2016)
• Publication Date: 2016-05
• Subjects: cervical disk arthroplasty -- cervical spondylosis -- adjacent segment disease -- M6-C -- cervical fusion; Spinal cord -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Spinal cord -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.56059
• DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000025
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2380-0186

Abstract

Abstract : Study Design: Retrospective study. Objective: To determine the short-term clinical succesrate of the M6-C cervical disk prosthesis in primary and secondary surgery. Summary of Background Data: Cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) provides an alternative to anterior cervical decompression and fusion for the treatment of spondylotic radiculopathy or myelopathy. The prevention of adjacent segment disease (ASD), a possible complication of anterior cervical decompression and fusion, is its most cited—although unproven—benefit. Unlike older arthroplasty devices that rely on a ball-and-socket–type design, the M6-C cervical disk prosthesis represents a new generation of unconstrained implants, developed to achieve better restoration of natural segmental biomechanics. This device should therefore optimize clinical performance of CDA and reduce ASD. Materials and Methods: All patients had preoperative computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging and postoperative x-rays. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Neck Disability Index, a Visual Analog Scale, and the SF-36 questionnaire. Patients were asked about overall satisfaction and whether they would have the surgery again. Results: Thirty-three patients were evaluated 17.1 months after surgery, on average. Nine patients had a history of cervical interventions. Results for Neck Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale, and SF-36 were significantly better among patients who had undergone primary surgery. In this group, 87.5% of patients reported a good or excellent result and 91.7% would have the procedure again. In contrast, all 4 device-related complications occurred in the small group of patients who had secondary surgery. Conclusions: The M6-C prosthesis appears to be a valuable addition to the CDA armatorium. It generates very good results in patients undergoing primary surgery, although its use in secondary surgery should be avoided. Longer follow-up is needed to determine to what measure this device can prevent ASD.