Vázquez CR, Aguirre H, Zárate KB, Reyes-Sánchez A

Language: Spanish
References: 29
Page: 17-23
PDF size: 193.09 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Degenerative disc diseases (DDD) have an incidence of 40% of working-age people. We analize the probable etiological factors that favor its appearance, such as age, sex, race, smoking, etc. The pathogenesis includes different theories, the most accepted is disc degeneration caused by stiffness in the annulus and osmotic pressure decrease of nucleus pulpous, with unbalanced loads and increased stress. We review the traditional surgical methods of treatment as well as new contributions like total and partial arthroplasties. Nuclear replacement is classified in: Hydrogels; PDN-SOLO and the PDN-Hydraflex ,the nucleus NeuDisc-Duplication and Galiflex, Sythetic Polymers like DASCOR, Nucore, core injection device, SINUXANR and BioDisc. Other studies that are oriented towards mechanical technology that transmits forces uniformly across the disc space are Regain EBI and Nubac. Hydrogel Aquarelle Nucleus is a viscoelastic material which evenly distributes loads on plataformsterminals. Newcleus has a polycarbonate urethane elastomer which aligns the molecular chains in a specific configuration. Conclusion: The advent of disc arthroplasty technologies will improve the pain while preserving function (movement) and, theoretically, protect the adjacent segment.

REFERENCES

1. Adams MA, Roughley PJ. What is intervertebral disc degeneration, and what causes it? Spine. 2006; 31 (18): 2151-2161.

2. Aguirre AA, Mireles-Cano JN, Olivares MR, Miramontes-Martínez V, Reyes-Sánchez A. Evaluación clínica y radiológica de la prótesis de núcleo discal Nubac. Informe preliminar. Cir Ciruj. 2008; 76 (4): 317-321.

3. Hirsch C. Studies on the pathology of low back pain. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984; 41: 237-243.

4. Huang R, Wright T, Panjabi M, Lipman J. Biomechanics of non-fusion implants. Orthopedic Clinics of North America. 2005; 36 (3): 271-280.

5. Frymoyer JW. Lumbar disk disease: epidemiology. Instr Course Lect. 1992; 41: 217-223.

6. Ala-Kokko L. Genetic risk factors for lumbar disc disease. Ann Med. 2002; 34: 42-47.

7. Burns JW, Loecker TH, Fischer JR Jr et al. Prevalence and significance of spinal disc abnormalities in an asymptomatic acceleration subject panel. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1996; 67 (9): 849-853.

8. Jones G, White C, Sambrook P et al. Allelic variation in the vitamin D receptor, lifestyle factors and lumbar spinal degenerative disease. Ann Rheum Dis. 1998; 57: 94-99.

9. Takahashi M, Haro H, Wakabayashi Y et al. The association of degeneration of the intervertebral disc with 5a./6a. polymorphism in the promoter of the human matrix metalloproteinase-3 gene. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001; 83: 491-495.

10. Silber JS, Dagly K, Brown Z, Patel A, Vaccaro AR. Nucleus Arthroplasty™ Technology, Book 1: Fundamentals. How the disc degenerates? Chapter 1. USA: Raymedica, LLC; 2006. pp. 3-9.

11. Setton LA, Chen J. Cell mechanics and mechanobiology in the intervertebral disc. Spine. 2004; 29 (23): 2710-2723.

12. Cunningham ME, Girardi FP. Nucleus Arthroplasty™ Technology, Book 1: Fundamentals. Chapter 6. USA: Raymedica, LLC; 2006. pp. 27-34.

13. Traynelis VC. Spinal arthroplasty. Neurosurg Focus. 2002; 13 (2): 2E10.

14. Hsu KY, Zucherman J, White A et al. Deterioration of motion segments adjacent to lumbar spine fusions. Trans N Am Spine Soc. 1988; 12: 605-605.

15. Hutter CG. Spinal stenosis and posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Clin Orthop. 1985; 193: 103-114.

16. Lehmann TR, Spratt KF, Tozzi JE et al. Long-term follow-up of lower lumbar fusion patients. Spine. 1987; 12: 97-104.

17. Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA et al. Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg (Am). 1999; 81: 519-528.

18. Hilibrand AS, Yoo JU, Carlson GD et al. The success of anterior cervical arthrodesis adjacent to a previous fusion. Spine. 22: 1997; 1574-1579.

19. Bao OB, Yuan HA. New technologies in Spine. Spine. 2002; 27 (11): 1245-1247.

20. Ray CD, Schönmayr R, Kavanagh SA et al. Prosthetic disc nucleus implants. Riv Neuroradiol. 1999; 12 (Suppl. 1): 157-162.

21. Schönmayr R, Busch C, Lotz C et al. Prosthetic disc nucleus implants: the Wiesbaden feasibility study. 2- year follow-up in ten patients. Riv Neuroradiol. 1999; 12 (Suppl. 1): 163-170.

22. Bertagnoli R, Vázquez RJ. The Antero Lateral Transpoatic Approach (ALPA). A new technique for implanting prostetic disc-nucleus devices. Journal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques. 2003; 16 (4): 398-404.

23. Shim CS, Lee SH, Park CW, Choi WC, Choi G, Choi WG et al. Partial disc replacement with the PDN prosthetic disc nucleus device: early clinical results. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003; 16 (4): 324-330.

24. Reyes-Sánchez AA, Arriada N, Miramontes MV, Alpizar AA, Rosales OLM. Evolución clínica y radiológica en el tratamiento de hernia discal con prótesis PDN-SOLO con ancla: seguimiento mínimo a tres años. COLUMNA/COLUMNA. 2010; 9 (1): 1-7.

25. Jin D, Qu D, Zhao L, Chen J, Jiang J. Prosthetic disc nucleus (PDN) replacement for lumbar disc herniation: preliminary report with six months’ follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003; 16 (4): 331-337.

26. Coric D, Mummaneni PV. Nucleus replacement technologies. Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nervs, March 2007. Journal of neurosurgery. Spine. 2008; 8 (2): 115-120.

27. Mulholland RC, Dilip K. Sengupta. Rationale, principles and experimental evaluation of the concept of soft stabilization. Review. Eur Spine J. 2002; 11 (Suppl. 2): S198-S205.

28. Gaetani P, Aimar E, Panella L, Debernardi A, Tancioni F, Rodriguez y Baena R. Surgery for herniated lumbar disc disease: factors influencing outcome measures. An analysis of 403 cases. Funct Neurol. 2004; 19 (1): 43-49.

29. Kim Y. Prediction of peripheral tears in the anulus of the intervertebral disc. Spine. 2000; 25 (14): 1771-1774.