Total disc replacement for chronic back pain in the presence of disc degeneration

Department of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands. .
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (Impact Factor: 6.03). 09/2012; 9(9):CD008326. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008326.pub2
Source: PubMed


In the search for better surgical treatment of chronic low-back pain (LBP) in the presence of disc degeneration, total disc replacement has received increasing attention in recent years. A possible advantage of total disc replacement compared with fusion is maintained mobility at the operated level, which has been suggested to reduce the chance of adjacent segment degeneration.
The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effect of total disc replacement for chronic low-back pain in the presence of lumbar disc degeneration compared with other treatment options in terms of patient-centred improvement, motion preservation and adjacent segment degeneration.
A comprehensive search in Cochrane Back Review Group (CBRG) trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, ISI, and the FDA register was conducted. We also checked the reference lists and performed citation tracking of included studies.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing total disc replacement with any other intervention for degenerative disc disease.
We assessed risk of bias per study using the criteria of the CBRG. Quality of evidence was graded according to the GRADE approach. Two review authors independently selected studies and assessed risk of bias of the studies. Results and upper bounds of confidence intervals were compared against predefined clinically relevant differences.
We included 40 publications, describing seven unique RCT's. The follow-up of the studies was 24 months, with only one extended to five years. Five studies had a low risk of bias, although there is a risk of bias in the included studies due to sponsoring and absence of any kind of blinding. One study compared disc replacement against rehabilitation and found a statistically significant advantage in favour of surgery, which, however, did not reach the predefined threshold for clinical relevance. Six studies compared disc replacement against fusion and found that the mean improvement in VAS back pain was 5.2 mm (of 100 mm) higher (two studies, 676 patients; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 10.26) with a low quality of evidence while from the same studies leg pain showed no difference. The improvement of Oswestry score at 24 months in the disc replacement group was 4.27 points more than in the fusion group (five studies; 1207 patients; 95% CI 1.85 to 6.68) with a low quality of evidence. Both upper bounds of the confidence intervals for VAS back pain and Oswestry score were below the predefined clinically relevant difference. Choice of control group (circumferential or anterior fusion) did not appear to result in different outcomes.
Although statistically significant, the differences between disc replacement and conventional fusion surgery for degenerative disc disease were not beyond the generally accepted clinical important differences with respect to short-term pain relief, disability and Quality of Life. Moreover, these analyses only represent a highly selected population. The primary goal of prevention of adjacent level disease and facet joint degeneration by using total disc replacement, as noted by the manufacturers and distributors, was not properly assessed and not a research question at all. Unfortunately, evidence from observational studies could not be used because of the high risk of bias, while these could have improved external validity assessment of complications in less selected patient groups. Non-randomised studies should however be very clear about patient selection and should incorporate independent, blinded outcome assessment, which was not the case in the excluded studies. Therefore, because we believe that harm and complications may occur after years, we believe that the spine surgery community should be prudent about adopting this technology on a large scale, despite the fact that total disc replacement seems to be effective in treating low-back pain in selected patients, and in the short term is at least equivalent to fusion surgery.

Download full-text


Available from: Wilco C H Jacobs,
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article provides a summary of the many causes of back pain in adults. There is an overview of the history and physical examination with attention paid to red flags that alert the clinician to more worrisome causes of low back pain. An extensive differential diagnosis for back pain in adults is provided along with key historical and physical examination findings. The various therapeutic options are summarized with an emphasis on evidence-based findings. These reviewed treatments include medication, physical therapy, topical treatments, injections, and complementary and alternative medicine. The indications for surgery and specialty referral are also discussed.
    Primary care 06/2013; 40(2):271-88. DOI:10.1016/j.pop.2013.02.002 · 0.74 Impact Factor

  • Journal of neurosurgery. Spine 06/2013; 19(2). DOI:10.3171/2013.4.SPINE13324 · 2.38 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Low back pain, in its acute and chronic forms, is one of the most common health problems and is frequently evaluated by rheumatologists. The multiple possible diagnoses associated with this symptom make correctly attributing back pain to a specific disease difficult. This dilemma necessitates an organized approach to separate patients with mechanical disorders from those with rare systemic disorders. The most common forms of back pain are mechanical. Gradual modifications in the axial skeletal structures over time result in pathological disorders that generally occur later in an individual's lifespan. The diagnostic process that identifies these mechanical disorders is straightforward and does not require expensive radiological or laboratory tests in the early phases of the evaluation. Most low back pain resolves without intervention, but some reports suggest that episodes of back pain are persistent or recurring for a substantial minority of patients. Therapies for back pain can be nonpharmacological, pharmacological or surgical. All interventions have limited capacity to resolve low back pain. Nonsurgical therapies are preferred for muscle injuries and osteoarthritis of the lumbar spine. Surgical interventions can resolve the pain and dysfunction of disc herniation and spinal stenosis more rapidly than conventional therapy, but surgical benefit wanes over time.
    Nature Reviews Rheumatology 09/2013; 9(11). DOI:10.1038/nrrheum.2013.133 · 9.85 Impact Factor
Show more