Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Revista Chilena de Ortopedia y Traumatología 2021; 62(03): e174-e179
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740171
Artículo Original | Original Article

Prevalencia de la osificación heterotópica tras artroplastia de disco cervical a los 5 años

Article in several languages: español | English
Ivan A. Stepanov 
1   Departamento de Cirugía General y Anestesiología, Irkutsk State Medical University, Irkutsk, Russia
,
Vladimir A. Beloborodov
1   Departamento de Cirugía General y Anestesiología, Irkutsk State Medical University, Irkutsk, Russia
› Author Affiliations Financiamiento Los autores no tienen fuentes de financiamiento que declarar.
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Resumen

Introducción En los últimos años, la artroplastia de disco cervical (ADC) se ha utilizado ampliamente en pacientes como alternativa a la disectomía y fusión cervical anterior (DFCA). Sin embargo, se han informado osificación heterotópica (OH) y fusion espontánea después de ADCs, y el desarrollo de OH puede dificultar el mantenimiento de movimiento después de la artroplastia.

Materiales y Métodos El procedimiento ADC con prótesis Activ C y M6-C se realizó en 127 pacientes. El tiempo medio de seguimiento fue de 58.4 meses, con un rango de 51 a 66 meses.

Resultados Las osificaciones de grado 1 estuvieron presentes en 11 niveles (8,6%). Un total de 45 (35,4%) segmentos eran de OH de grado 2. Las OHs que produjeron restricciones del rango de movimiento estuvieron presentes en 13 (10,2%) casos. A los 5 años de seguimiento, sólo había 9 (7,0%) pacientes con osificación de grado 4 en el grupo de prótesis de disco artificial M6-C. En el análisis de la supervivencia tras la ocurrencia de OH, la mediana de los pacientes fue de 28,3 ± 5,6 meses. El grupo de prótesis de disco artificial Activ C tuvo una supervivencia estadísticamente más larga (49,5 ± 7,8 meses) que el grupo de disco M6-C.

Conclusiónes En este estudio, el 61,4% de los pacientes desarrollaron OH en un período de seguimiento medio de 58,4 meses. En el análisis de la supervivencia tras la ocurrencia de OH, la mediana de los pacientes fue de 28.3 ± 5.6 meses. El grupo de prótesis de disco artificial Activ C tuvo una supervivencia estadísticamente más larga (49.5 ± 7.8 meses) que el grupo de disco M6-C.

Palabras Clave

discectomía y fusión cervical anterior - artroplastia de disco cervical - osificación heterotópica - prevalencia - prótesis Activ C - prótesis M6-C

Aprobación Ética

La aprobación de la junta de revisión institucional fue obtenida por el comité de ética de la Irkutsk State Medical University (2013–51/5).




Publication History

Received: 03 June 2020

Accepted: 06 August 2021

Article published online:
22 December 2021

© 2021. Sociedad Chilena de Ortopedia y Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referencias

  • 1 Ofluoglu AE, Erdogan U, Aydogan M, Cevik OM, Ofluoglu O. Anterior cervical fusion with interbody cage containing beta-tricalcium phosphate: Clinical and radiological results. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2017; 51 (03) 197-200
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Wang T, Wang H, Liu S, An HD, Liu H, Ding WY. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion in multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016; 95 (49) e5437
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Byvaltsev VA, Stepanov IA, Riew DK. Mid-term to long-term outcomes after total cervical disk arthroplasty compared with Anterior diskectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Spine Surg 2020; 33 (05) 192-200
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Skeppholm M, Svedmark P, Noz ME, Maguire Jr GQ, Olivecrona H, Olerud C. Evaluation of mobility and stability in the Discover artificial disc: an in vivo motion study using high-accuracy 3D CT data. J Neurosurg Spine 2015; 23 (03) 383-389
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Gornet MF, Lanman TH, Burkus JK. et al. Cervical disc arthroplasty with the Prestige LP disc versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, at 2 levels: results of a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial at 24 months. J Neurosurg Spine 2017; 26 (06) 653-667
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Rožanković M, Marasanov SM, Vukić M. Cervical Disk Replacement With Discover Versus Fusion in a Single-Level Cervical Disk Disease: A Prospective Single-Center Randomized Trial With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up. Clin Spine Surg 2017; 30 (05) E515-E522
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Sundseth J, Fredriksli OA, Kolstad F. et al; NORCAT study group. The Norwegian Cervical Arthroplasty Trial (NORCAT): 2-year clinical outcome after single-level cervical arthroplasty versus fusion-a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, controlled multicenter study. Eur Spine J 2017; 26 (04) 1225-1235
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Zeng J, Liu H, Chen H. et al. Comparison of Heterotopic Ossification After Fixed- and Mobile-Core Cervical Disc Arthroplasty. World Neurosurg 2018; 120: e1319-e1324
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Arnold PM, Anderson KK, Selim A, Dryer RF, Kenneth Burkus J. Heterotopic ossification following single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: results from the prospective, multicenter, historically controlled trial comparing allograft to an optimized dose of rhBMP-2. J Neurosurg Spine 2016; 25 (03) 292-302
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Devine J, Williams E, Yu-Yahiro J. Classification of heterotopic ossification (HO) in artificial disk replacement. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003; 16 (04) 384-389
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Williams JR. The Declaration of Helsinki and public health. Bull World Health Organ 2008; 86 (08) 650-652
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Tu TH, Wu JC, Huang WC. et al. Heterotopic ossification after cervical total disc replacement: determination by CT and effects on clinical outcomes. J Neurosurg Spine 2011; 14 (04) 457-465
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Mehren C, Suchomel P, Grochulla F. et al. Heterotopic ossification in total cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine 2006; 31 (24) 2802-2806
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Lee SE, Jahng TA, Kim HJ. Correlation between cervical lordosis and adjacent segment pathology after anterior cervical spinal surgery. Eur Spine J 2015; 24 (12) 2899-2909
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Leung C, Casey AT, Goffin J. et al. Clinical significance of heterotopic ossification in cervical disc replacement: a prospective multicenter clinical trial. Neurosurgery 2005; 57 (04) 759-763 , discussion 759–763
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Yang H, Lu X, Yuan W, Wang X, Chen D, Zhao D. Artificial disk replacement in the treatment of degenerative cervical disk disorder: a 30-year follow-up study. Spine 2014; 39 (19) 1564-1571
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Jin YJ, Park SB, Kim MJ, Kim K-J, Kim H-J. An analysis of heterotopic ossification in cervical disc arthroplasty: a novel morphologic classification of an ossified mass. Spine J 2013; 13 (04) 408-420
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Nunley PD, Cavanaugh DA, Kerr III EJ. et al. Heterotopic Ossification After Cervical Total Disc Replacement at 7 Years-Prevalence, Progression, Clinical Implications, and Risk Factors. Int J Spine Surg 2018; 12 (03) 352-361
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Yi S, Kim KN, Yang MS. et al. Difference in occurrence of heterotopic ossification according to prosthesis type in the cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine 2010; 35 (16) 1556-1561
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Park JH, Rhim SC, Roh SW. Mid-term follow-up of clinical and radiologic outcomes in cervical total disk replacement (Mobi-C): incidence of heterotopic ossification and risk factors. J Spinal Disord Tech 2013; 26 (03) 141-145
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Sodemann B, Persson PE, Nilsson OS. Prevention of heterotopic ossification by nonsteroid antiinflammatory drugs after total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988; (237) 158-163
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Tu TH, Wu JC, Huang WC. et al. Postoperative nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and the prevention of heterotopic ossification after cervical arthroplasty: analysis using CT and a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 2015; 22 (05) 447-453
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Yi S, Shin DA, Kim KN. et al. The predisposing factors for the heterotopic ossification after cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine J 2013; 13 (09) 1048-1054
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar