Skip to main content
  • Long-Term Safety and Efficacy Outcomes of an Artificial Cervical Disc Replacement at Two Levels: Results from a Level 1 Prospective Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

    Final Number:

    Todd H. Lanman MD FACS; J Kenneth Burkus MD; Randall Dryer; Matthew F Gornet MD; Jeffrey R. McConnell MD; Scott Hodges DO

    Study Design:
    Clinical Trial

    Subject Category:

    Meeting: Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2016 Annual Meeting

    Introduction: Up to 40% of patients treated for cervical degenerative disc disease have two-level treatment, warranting study of use of disc replacement devices at more than one cervical level. The objective of this study was to determine long-term clinical safety and effectiveness outcomes in patients undergoing anterior cervical surgery using an artificial disc replacement (ADR) prosthesis to treat degenerative disease at two adjacent levels. Outcomes at 7 years after surgery were compared to those from a standard treatment, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

    Methods: A prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter FDA-approved clinical trial was conducted at 30 US centers comparing a low profile titanium ceramic composite based ADR, (n=209) at two levels with an ACDF procedure (n=188). Patients were followed at regular intervals to 7 years. The primary endpoint was overall success, a composite variable that included key safety and efficacy considerations.

    Results: At 7 years, the ADR demonstrated statistical superiority over fusion on overall success, observed rate (78.6 % vs 62.7%, respectively; posterior probability of superiority pps=99.8%), Neck Disability Index success (87% vs 75.6%; pps=99.2%), and neurological success (91.6% vs 82.1%; pps=99.0%). All other study effectiveness measures were non-inferior for ADR compared to ACDF. There was no significant difference in overall rate of implant/surgical procedure-related adverse events up to 7 years (26.6% and 27.7%, respectively), but the ADR group had fewer Grade 3-4 implant/surgical procedure-related adverse events (3.2% vs 7.2%, log hazard ratio (LHR) and 95% Bayesian Credible Interval (BCI): -1.19 (-2.29, -0.15)). The ADR group also had significantly fewer secondary surgical procedures at index level (4.2%) than the fusion group (14.7%) (LHR (95% BCI): -1.29 (-2.12, -0.46)). Angular range of motion at superior and inferior target levels was maintained in the ADR group to 7 years.

    Conclusions: The low profile artificial cervical disc in this study, implanted at two adjacent levels, maintains improved clinical outcomes and segmental motion 7 years after surgery and is an alternative to fusion.

    Patient Care: It will provide evidence that patients will clinically have similar if not better outcomes with 2 level cervical arthroplasty versus 2 level cervical fusion and maintain cervical motion at the index levels.

    Learning Objectives: To demonstrate the efficacy and clinical benefits of 2 level total disc cervical arthroplasty.


We use cookies to improve the performance of our site, to analyze the traffic to our site, and to personalize your experience of the site. You can control cookies through your browser settings. Please find more information on the cookies used on our site. Privacy Policy