title: Does design matter? Cervical disc replacements under review.
abstract: The present article reviews the design rationale of currently available cervical disc replacements. Recent prospective randomized control trials comparing cervical disc replacement and anterior fusion have demonstrated safety as well as equal or superior clinical results. Increasingly, more devices are becoming available on the market. Understanding design rationale will provide context for the surgeon to optimize decision making for the most appropriate prosthesis. Cervical arthroplasty is a technique that is undergoing rapid design refinement and development. Further improvements in device design will enable patient-specific device selection. Understanding the design rationale and complication profile of each device will improve clinical and radiographic outcomes.
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Division of Neurosurgery, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
authors.forename: Michael D
authors.initials: MD
authors.lastname: Staudt
authors.affiliation: Department of Neurosurgery, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA.
authors.forename: Kaushik
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Das
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Division of Neurosurgery, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. neil.duggal@lhsc.on.ca.
authors.forename: Neil
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Duggal
mesh_terms: D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D002574:Cervical Vertebrae / Q000601:surgery*; D006801:Humans; D007403:Intervertebral Disc / Q000601:surgery*; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000209:etiology; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D013123:Spinal Fusion / Q000379:methods; D059145:Total Disc Replacement / Q000295:instrumentation*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D001672:Biocompatible Materials
keywords: Artificial cervical disc; Biomaterials; Cervical arthroplasty; Complications; Design; Kinematics; Kyphosis