Heterotopic Ossification in Cervical Disk Surgery Is Still a Problem. What Are the Key Factors for a Solution?

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridSanchez Lite, Israel/0000-0002-1114-2026
dc.authoridNoriega, David C/0000-0002-5909-1555
dc.contributor.authorCesar Noriega, David
dc.contributor.authorHernandez Ramajo, Ruben
dc.contributor.authorSanchez-Lite, Israel
dc.contributor.authorToribio, Borja
dc.contributor.authorDelen, Emle
dc.contributor.authorSahin, Soner
dc.date.accessioned2024-06-12T10:51:53Z
dc.date.available2024-06-12T10:51:53Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.departmentTrakya Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to determine the presence of heterotopic ossifications (HO) in a series of patients with cervical disk arthroplasty treated with different type of prosthesis, as well as to analyze the most suitable systems for diagnosis. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients with cervical disk disease treated with cervical arthroplasty between May 2005 and December 2009, was performed. Patients were divided into 3 groups, depending on the prosthesis implanted: (Group A: Baguera prosthesis, Group B: ProDisc prosthesis, and Group C: PCM prosthesis). The presence of heterotopic ossifications was evaluated with both, simple radiology and computed tomography. RESULTS: As a summary of the results on motion preservation, computed tomography scans showed that 63% of the cervical arthroplasties in Group A presented good mobility at the first check point (December 2010), whereas cervical arthroplasties in Group B and Group C had 74% and 65% severe motion restrictions, respectively (Grade III or Grade IV, according to McAfee classification). The differences between groups were statistically significant when comparing Groups A and B, and Groups A and C (P < 0.05), but there were no differences between Groups B and C (P < 0.05). At the second check point (December 2014), the good mobility was just preserved in the 26% of the disk replacements (all in Group A). CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that, although cervical disks provide optimal mid-term results, the incidence of HO seems to increase with time. Long term studies, with a larger sample size should be conducted to evaluate the appearance of HO and cervical motion after total disk replacement.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.wneu.2016.08.078
dc.identifier.endpage590en_US
dc.identifier.issn1878-8750
dc.identifier.issn1878-8769
dc.identifier.pmid27567584en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84992163478en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2en_US
dc.identifier.startpage585en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.08.078
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14551/18508
dc.identifier.volume96en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000396442500081en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ2en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Science Incen_US
dc.relation.ispartofWorld Neurosurgeryen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectAnterioren_US
dc.subjectCervicalen_US
dc.subjectCervical Arthroplastyen_US
dc.subjectDiscectomyen_US
dc.subjectHeterotopic Ossificationen_US
dc.subjectArthroplastyen_US
dc.subjectFusionen_US
dc.subjectReplacementen_US
dc.titleHeterotopic Ossification in Cervical Disk Surgery Is Still a Problem. What Are the Key Factors for a Solution?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu