Study of the Safety and Effectiveness of the Artificial Cervical Disc - Low Profile Device at Two Adjacent Levels

NCT00637156 — Not applicable, Completed, 397 participants, Medtronic Spinal and Biologics

ClinicalTrials Daily  ·  Areas  ·  Conditions  ·  Drugs  ·  Sponsors  ·  

A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Pivotal Clinical Trial of the Artificial Cervical Disc-LP at Two Levels for Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease

RegistryNCT00637156
StatusCompleted
PhaseNot applicable
Study typeInterventional; randomized, parallel, masking: none, treatment
Enrollment397 (Actual)
SponsorMedtronic Spinal and Biologics (Industry)
ConditionsCervical Degenerative Disc Disease, Radiculopathy, Myelopathy
InterventionsPRESTIGE LP device at two adjacent levels, Bi-level fusion with ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System (Device)
Datesstart 2006-06-01, primary completion 2011-01-01, completion 2018-02-01, first posted 2008-03-17, last updated 2018-05-01
Locations29 sites in United States

Related Papers Related Patents Related Grants Related Experts
All trials for Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease All trials for Radiculopathy All trials of PRESTIGE LP device at two adjacent levels All trials of Bi-level fusion with ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System

-Summary

The purpose of this clinical investigation is to assess the safety and effectiveness of using the PRESTIGE-LP device in the treatment of patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease at two adjacent levels of the cervical spine, with overall success being the primary endpoint of the clinical trial. The primary objective is to show non-inferiority of the investigational device to the control treatment. If non-inferiority is established, superiority will also be examined as the secondary objective.

Expand all sections  ·  Collapse all

+Detailed description

This clinical investigation is being conducted to evaluate the PRESTIGE-LP device's performance at two adjacent cervical levels (C3-C7) in the treatment of patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease. One-half of the patients in this randomized pivotal clinical trial will be treated at two adjacent cervical levels with the PRESTIGE-LP device. The remaining patients will receive a bi-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with cortical ring allografts and the ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System.

+Arms and interventions

ArmTypeInterventionsDescription
PRESTIGE LP DeviceExperimentalDevice: PRESTIGE LP device at two adjacent levels
ATLANTIS Cervical Plate SystemOtherDevice: Bi-level fusion with ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System
  • PRESTIGE LP device at two adjacent levels (Device), also known as disc, artificial disc, cervical disc: PRESTIGE LP is a prosthetic device intended to replace a damaged disc in the cervical spine and intended to act as an intervertebral body spacer rather than a fusion device. It is inserted using an anterior surgical approach.
  • Bi-level fusion with ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System (Device), also known as plate, cervical plate, fusion, cervical fusion: Bi-level anterior cervical fusion procedure involving cortical ring allograft and the ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System.

+Outcome measures

Primary outcomes

  • Rate of Overall Success [24 Months]: Rate of overall success is reported as the percentage of participants who met all of the following criteria: 1. Postoperative Neck Disability Index (NDI) score improvement of at least a 15-point increase from preoperative; 2. Maintenance or improvement in neurological status; 3. No serious adverse event classified as implant associated or implant/surgical procedure associated; and 4. No additional surgical procedure classified as a "failure."

Secondary outcomes

  • Success Rate of Neck Disability Index [24 months]: Success rate of Neck Disability Index is reported as the percentage of participants whose neck disability index score met the following criterion: Pre-treatment Score - Post-treatment Score ≥ 15.
  • Success Rate of Neurological Status [24 months]: Success rate of neurological status is reported as the percentage of participants who met neurological success defined as maintenance or improvement in all sections (motor, sensory, and reflexes) for the time period evaluated. In order for a section to be considered a success, each element in the section must either remain the same or improve from the time of the preoperative evaluation to the time period evaluated.
  • Neck Pain Success Rate [24 months]: Numerical rating scales were used to evaluate pain intensity and frequency. The pain score (0 min, 20 max) was derived by adding the numerical rating scores from the pain intensity (0-10, with a score of 0 representing "no pain" and a score of 10 representing "pain as bad as it could be.") and frequency scales (0-10, with a score of 0 being "pain none of the time" and a score of 10 being "pain all of the time"). Neck pain success rate is reported as the percentage of participants whose neck pain improvement met the following criterion: Preoperative Score - Postoperative Score > 0.
  • Arm Pain Success Rate [24 months]: Numerical rating scales were used to evaluate pain intensity and frequency. The pain score (0 min, 20 max) was derived by adding the numerical rating scores from the pain intensity (0-10, with a score of 0 representing "no pain" and a score of 10 representing "pain as bad as it could be.") and frequency scales (0-10, with a score of 0 being "pain none of the time" and a score of 10 being "pain all of the time"). Arm pain success rate is reported as the percentage of participants whose arm pain improvement met the following criterion: Preoperative Score - Postoperative Score > 0.
  • Success Rate of SF-36 PCS [24 months]: Success rate of SF-36 Health Survey include two components: the success rate of a physical component summary (PCS) and the success rate of a mental component summary (MCS). The success of SF-36 PCS was defined as: Post Score - Pre Score >= 0. The Success rate of SF-36 PCS is reported as the percentage of the participants who were classified as a success for SF-36 PCS.
  • Success Rate of SF-36 MCS [24 months]: Success rate of SF-36 Health Survey include two components: the success rate of a physical component summary (PCS) and the success rate of a mental component summary (MCS). The success of SF-36 MCS were defined as: Post Score - Pre Score >= 0. The Success rate of SF-36 MCS is reported as the percentage of the participants who were classified as a success for SF-36 MCS.
  • Rate of Disc Height Success [24 months]: Disc height was assessed by determining the Functional Spinal Unit (FSU) height. The rate of disc height success is reported as the percentage of participants whose disc height for each level based on either the anterior or posterior measurements met the following criterion: Postoperative Height - 6 Week Postoperative Height >= -2mm
  • Gait Success Rate [24 months]: Patient's gait was assessed by using Nurick's classification, and indicated either as normal or graded on a scale of 0 to 5. Success was defined as maintenance or improvement in the postoperative status as compared to the preoperative condition: Preoperative Score - Postoperative Score >= 0. The gait success rate is reported as the percentage of participants who had gait success.
  • Operative Time [Time of operation, an average of 1.7-2.1hrs]: Operative time was recorded from skin incision to wound closure.
  • Blood Loss [During the time of operation, an average of 1.7-2.1 hrs]
  • Hospital Stay [From admission to discharge, an average of 1.0-1.5 day]
  • Rate of Secondary Surgery at Index Level [24 months]: Secondary surgical procedures at the index level included revisions, removals, supplemental fixations and reoperations. Rate of secondary surgery at index level is reported as percentage of subjects who had secondary surgeries at index level.
  • Change of Neck Disability Index Score From Baseline [Baseline and 24 months post-operation]: The self-administered Neck Disability Index (NDI) Questionnaire was used to assess patient neck pain and ability to function. The NDI scale ranges from 0-100. The best score is 0 (no disability) and worst is 100 (maximum disability). Change of NDI was defined as NDI at 24 month minus NDI at baseline.
  • Change of Neck Pain Score From Baseline [Baseline and 24 months post-operation]: Numerical rating scales were used to evaluate neck pain intensity and frequency. Subjects rated their neck pain intensity on a scale from 0-10, with a score of 0 representing "no pain" and a score of 10 representing "pain as bad as it could be." Similarly, subjects recorded their neck pain frequency on a scale from 0-10, with a score of 0 being "pain none of the time" and a score of 10 being "pain all of the time." The total neck pain score (0 to 20) was the addition of pain intensity and frequency scores. Change of neck pain score was defined as neck pain score at 24 months minus neck pain score at baseline.
  • Change of Arm Pain Score From Baseline [Baseline and 24 months post-operation]: Numerical rating scales were also used to evaluate arm pain intensity and frequency. Subjects rated their arm pain intensity on a scale from 0-10, with a score of 0 representing "no pain" and a score of 10 representing "pain as bad as it could be." Similarly, subjects recorded their arm pain frequency on a scale from 0-10, with a score of 0 being "pain none of the time" and a score of 10 being "pain all of the time." The total arm pain score (0 to 20) was the addition of pain intensity and frequency scores. Change of arm pain score was defined as arm pain score at 24 months minus arm pain score at baseline.
  • Change of General Health Status -- SF-36 PCS From Baseline [Baseline and 24 months post-operation]: The Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) was used to assess general health status. The SF-36 results were summarized into two components, a physical component summary (PCS) and a mental component summary (MCS). The score for PCS was between 0 and 100, with higher scores denoting better quality of life. Change of SF-36 PCS score was defined as PCS score at 24 months minus PCS score at baseline.
  • Change of General Health Status -- SF-36 MCS From Baseline [Baseline and 24 months post-operation]: The Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) was used to assess general health status. The SF-36 results were summarized into two components, a physical component summary (PCS) and a mental component summary (MCS). The score for MCS was between 0 and 100, with higher scores denoting better quality of life. Change of SF-36 MCS score was defined as MCS score at 24 months minus MCS score at baseline.

+Eligibility

Sex: All, ages: 18 Years to any

Inclusion Criteria:

* Has cervical DDD at 2 adjacent cervical levels (C3-C7) requiring surgical treatment \& involving intractable radiculopathy, myelopathy, or both
* Has a herniated disc and/or osteophyte formation at each level to be treated that is producing symptomatic nerve root and/or spinal cord compression. The condition is documented by patient history, and the requirement for surgical treatment is evidenced by radiographic studies
* Unresponsive to non-operative treatment for approximately 6 weeks or has the presence of progressive symptoms or signs of nerve root/spinal cord compression in the face of continued non-operative management
* Has no previous surgical intervention at the involved levels or any subsequent planned/staged surgical procedure at the involved or adjacent level(s)
* Must be ≥ 18 years; skeletally mature at time of surgery
* Preoperative NDI score ≥ 30
* Preoperative neck pain score ≥ 8 based on the preoperative Neck and Arm Pain Questionnaire
* If a female of childbearing potential, patient is non-pregnant, non-nursing, and agrees not to become pregnant during the study period
* Is willing to comply with the study plan and sign Patient Informed Consent Form

Exclusion Criteria:

* Has a cervical spinal condition other than symptomatic cervical DDD requiring surgical treatment at the involved levels
* Has documented or diagnosed cervical instability relative to adjacent segments at either level, defined by dynamic (flexion/extension) radiographs showing: Sagittal plane translation > 3.5 mm, or Sagittal plane angulation > 20 degrees.
* Has more than two cervical levels requiring surgical treatment
* Has a fused level adjacent to the levels to be treated
* Has severe pathology of the facet joints of the involved vertebral bodies
* Has had previous surgical intervention at either one or both of the involved levels or at adjacent levels
* Has been previously diagnosed with osteopenia or osteomalacia
* Has any of the following that may be associated with a diagnosis of osteoporosis (If "Yes" to any of the below a DEXA Scan will be required to determine eligibility.)

  * Postmenopausal non-Black female over age of 60 who weighs < 140 pounds
  * Postmenopausal female who has sustained a non-traumatic hip, spine, or wrist fracture
  * Male > 70 years
  * Male > 60 years who has sustained a non-traumatic hip or spine fracture
  * If the level of BMD is a T score of -3.5 or lower or a T score of -2.5 or lower with vertebral crush fracture, then the patient is excluded from the study
* Has presence of spinal metastases
* Has overt or active bacterial infection, either local or systemic
* Has insulin dependent diabetes
* Is a tobacco user who does not agree to suspend smoking prior to surgery
* Has chronic or acute renal failure or prior history of renal disease
* Has a documented allergy or intolerance to stainless steel, titanium, or a titanium alloy
* Is mentally incompetent (If questionable, obtain psychiatric consult)
* Is a prisoner
* Is pregnant
* Is an alcohol and/or drug abuser as defined by currently undergoing treatment for alcohol and/or drug abuse
* Is involved with current or pending litigation regarding a spinal condition
* Has received drugs that may interfere with bone metabolism within two weeks prior to the planned date of spinal surgery (e.g., steroids or methotrexate), excluding routine perioperative anti-inflammatory drugs
* Has a history of an endocrine or metabolic disorder known to affect osteogenesis (e.g., Paget's Disease, renal osteodystrophy, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, or osteogenesis imperfecta)
* Has a condition that requires postoperative medications that interfere with the stability of the implant, such as steroids. (This does not include low-dose aspirin for prophylactic anticoagulation and routine perioperative anti-inflammatory drugs.)
* Has received treatment with an investigational therapy within 28 days prior to implantation surgery or such treatment is planned during the 16 weeks following implantation

+Posted results

Participant flow

MilestonePRESTIGE LP DeviceATLANTIS Cervical Plate System
Started209188
Completed199164
Not completed1024

Outcome results

  • Rate of Overall Success (Primary), Number, percentage of participants: PRESTIGE LP Device 81.4; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 69.4 (p 1.000)
  • Success Rate of Neck Disability Index (Secondary), Number, percentage of participants: PRESTIGE LP Device 87.9; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 79.2 (p 1.000)
  • Success Rate of Neurological Status (Secondary), Number, percentage of participants: PRESTIGE LP Device 91.5; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 86.2 (p 1.000)
  • Neck Pain Success Rate (Secondary), Number, percentage of participants: PRESTIGE LP Device 98.0; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 95.6 (p 1.000)
  • Arm Pain Success Rate (Secondary), Number, percentage of participants: PRESTIGE LP Device 88.9; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 89.9 (p 0.997)
  • Success Rate of SF-36 PCS (Secondary), Number, percentage of participants: PRESTIGE LP Device 90.4; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 87.8 (p 1.000)
  • Success Rate of SF-36 MCS (Secondary), Number, percentage of participants: PRESTIGE LP Device 69.0; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 72.4 (p 0.945)
  • Rate of Disc Height Success (Secondary), Number, percentage of participants: PRESTIGE LP Device 93.5; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 95.7 (p 0.997)
  • Gait Success Rate (Secondary), Number, percentage of participants: PRESTIGE LP Device 100.0; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 98.7 (p 1.000)
  • Operative Time (Secondary), Mean, hrs: PRESTIGE LP Device 2.1 +/- 0.8; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 1.7 +/- 0.7 (p 0.0)
  • Blood Loss (Secondary), Mean, ml: PRESTIGE LP Device 67.2 +/- 64.1; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 55.7 +/- 46.3 (p 0.02)
  • Hospital Stay (Secondary), Mean, days: PRESTIGE LP Device 1.2 +/- 0.5; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 1.3 +/- 1.0 (p 0.892)
  • Rate of Secondary Surgery at Index Level (Secondary), Number, percentage of participants: PRESTIGE LP Device 2.4; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 8.0
  • Change of Neck Disability Index Score From Baseline (Secondary), Mean, units on a scale: PRESTIGE LP Device 52.1 +/- 13.4; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 53.2 +/- 14.8
  • Change of Neck Pain Score From Baseline (Secondary), Mean, units on a scale: PRESTIGE LP Device 16.2 +/- 2.9; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 16.3 +/- 2.6
  • Change of Arm Pain Score From Baseline (Secondary), Mean, units on a scale: PRESTIGE LP Device 13.8 +/- 5.6; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 14.4 +/- 4.3
  • Change of General Health Status -- SF-36 PCS From Baseline (Secondary), Mean, units on a scale: PRESTIGE LP Device 31.8 +/- 7.8; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 30.8 +/- 7.4
  • Change of General Health Status -- SF-36 MCS From Baseline (Secondary), Mean, units on a scale: PRESTIGE LP Device 43.9 +/- 11.8; ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System 43.8 +/- 12.2

Adverse events

Time frame: up to 24 months

ArmDeathsSerious adverse eventsOther adverse events
PRESTIGE LP Device072/209 (34.4%)191/209 (91.4%)
ATLANTIS Cervical Plate System090/188 (47.9%)171/188 (91.0%)

Serious adverse events by term

TermOrgan systemPRESTIGE LP DeviceATLANTIS Cervical Plate System
AnaemiaBlood and lymphatic system disorders0/2091/188
LymphadenopathyBlood and lymphatic system disorders0/2091/188
Acute myocardial infarctionCardiac disorders0/2091/188
Aortic valve incompetenceCardiac disorders1/2090/188
Cardiac arrestCardiac disorders0/2091/188
Coronary artery diseaseCardiac disorders0/2091/188
Mitral valve incompetenceCardiac disorders1/2090/188
Myocardial ischaemiaCardiac disorders0/2091/188
PalpitationsCardiac disorders1/2091/188
Sinus bradycardiaCardiac disorders1/2090/188
TachycardiaCardiac disorders0/2091/188
Tricuspid valve incompetenceCardiac disorders1/2090/188
Ventricular tachycardiaCardiac disorders1/2090/188
Arnold-Chiari malformationCongenital, familial and genetic disorders1/2090/188
Chronic granulomatous diseaseCongenital, familial and genetic disorders0/2091/188
Myocardial bridgingCongenital, familial and genetic disorders1/2090/188
Spine malformationCongenital, familial and genetic disorders1/2090/188
VertigoEar and labyrinth disorders1/2090/188
Thyrotoxic crisisEndocrine disorders1/2090/188
BlindnessEye disorders0/2091/188
Cataract subcapsularEye disorders1/2090/188
ConjunctivitisEye disorders1/2090/188
Abdominal adhesionsGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Abdominal painGastrointestinal disorders4/2090/188
Abdominal pain lowerGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188
Abdominal pain upperGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Anal fistulaGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188
ConstipationGastrointestinal disorders1/2091/188
DiarrhoeaGastrointestinal disorders2/2093/188
DyspepsiaGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188
DysphagiaGastrointestinal disorders2/2091/188
GastritisGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Gastrooesophageal reflux diseaseGastrointestinal disorders1/2092/188
Impaired gastric emptyingGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Inguinal herniaGastrointestinal disorders1/2091/188
Mesenteric occlusionGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188
NauseaGastrointestinal disorders3/2097/188
Oesophageal disorderGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
PancreatitisGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188
Small intestinal obstructionGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Tooth lossGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
ToothacheGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188
VomitingGastrointestinal disorders3/2094/188
AbasiaGeneral disorders0/2091/188
Adverse drug reactionGeneral disorders1/2092/188
Chest discomfortGeneral disorders1/2090/188
Chest painGeneral disorders6/2094/188
ChillsGeneral disorders0/2091/188
CystGeneral disorders2/2090/188
DeathGeneral disorders0/2091/188
Device breakageGeneral disorders0/2091/188
Device connection issueGeneral disorders0/2092/188
Device dislocationGeneral disorders3/2094/188
Facial painGeneral disorders0/2091/188
FatigueGeneral disorders1/2090/188
Feeling abnormalGeneral disorders1/2090/188
Gait disturbanceGeneral disorders2/2090/188
HerniaGeneral disorders0/2091/188
PainGeneral disorders1/2094/188
PyrexiaGeneral disorders0/2092/188

235 more terms not shown.

Other adverse events by term

TermOrgan systemPRESTIGE LP DeviceATLANTIS Cervical Plate System
AnaemiaBlood and lymphatic system disorders1/2094/188
LymphadenopathyBlood and lymphatic system disorders0/2091/188
Microcytic anaemiaBlood and lymphatic system disorders0/2091/188
SplenomegalyBlood and lymphatic system disorders0/2091/188
ArrhythmiaCardiac disorders1/2090/188
Atrioventricular block second degreeCardiac disorders1/2090/188
BradycardiaCardiac disorders1/2091/188
Bundle branch block leftCardiac disorders1/2090/188
PalpitationsCardiac disorders2/2092/188
TachycardiaCardiac disorders2/2090/188
Congenital choroid plexus cystCongenital, familial and genetic disorders0/2091/188
Spine malformationCongenital, familial and genetic disorders0/2091/188
DeafnessEar and labyrinth disorders0/2091/188
Ear painEar and labyrinth disorders1/2093/188
Eustachian tube dysfunctionEar and labyrinth disorders0/2091/188
HypoacusisEar and labyrinth disorders1/2090/188
Meniere's diseaseEar and labyrinth disorders1/2090/188
TinnitusEar and labyrinth disorders2/2092/188
VertigoEar and labyrinth disorders1/2090/188
Vertigo positionalEar and labyrinth disorders1/2090/188
Adrenal cystEndocrine disorders1/2090/188
BlepharospasmEye disorders0/2091/188
CataractEye disorders1/2090/188
Conjunctival discolourationEye disorders1/2090/188
ConjunctivitisEye disorders1/2090/188
Eye swellingEye disorders0/2091/188
Eyelid ptosisEye disorders0/2091/188
Macular degenerationEye disorders0/2091/188
PapilloedemaEye disorders1/2090/188
PhotophobiaEye disorders1/2091/188
Scintillating scotomaEye disorders0/2091/188
Vision blurredEye disorders0/2091/188
Abdominal discomfortGastrointestinal disorders3/2090/188
Abdominal distensionGastrointestinal disorders1/2092/188
Abdominal painGastrointestinal disorders2/2092/188
Abdominal pain lowerGastrointestinal disorders1/2091/188
Abdominal pain upperGastrointestinal disorders1/2091/188
Acquired oesophageal webGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
CheilitisGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188
ColitisGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Colitis ulcerativeGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Colonic polypGastrointestinal disorders2/2093/188
ConstipationGastrointestinal disorders2/2092/188
Dental cariesGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188
DiarrhoeaGastrointestinal disorders2/2091/188
DiverticulumGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188
DyspepsiaGastrointestinal disorders4/2092/188
DysphagiaGastrointestinal disorders7/20917/188
EructationGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Functional gastrointestinal disorderGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188
Gastric haemorrhageGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Gastric polypsGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Gastric ulcerGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
GastritisGastrointestinal disorders3/2092/188
Gastrointestinal painGastrointestinal disorders1/2091/188
Gastrointestinal sounds abnormalGastrointestinal disorders1/2090/188
Gastrooesophageal reflux diseaseGastrointestinal disorders4/2096/188
HaemorrhoidsGastrointestinal disorders1/2091/188
Hiatus herniaGastrointestinal disorders2/2090/188
Inguinal herniaGastrointestinal disorders0/2091/188

463 more terms not shown.

+Locations (29)

FacilityCityCountryStatus
The Orthopaedic Center; Crestwood Medical CenterHuntsville, AlabamaUnited States
Todd Lanman, MD, FACS, A Professional Corp.;Beverly Hills, CaliforniaUnited States
Bone & Spine SurgeryColton, CaliforniaUnited States
La Jolla Neurological Associates, AMC; Scripps Memorial Hospital La Jolla; Scripps Memorial Hospital EncinitasLa Jolla, CaliforniaUnited States
St. Mary's Spine Center; St. Mary's HospitalSan Francisco, CaliforniaUnited States
Delaware Neurosurgical Group; Christiana Care Health SystemsNewark, DelawareUnited States
Spinal Associates, Gulf Coast HospitalPanama City, FloridaUnited States
Peachtree Neurosurgery, Northside HospitalAtlanta, GeorgiaUnited States
The Hughston Clinic, P.C., Hughston Hospital and Rehabilitation CenterColumbus, GeorgiaUnited States
Neuro Spine & Pain Center; Lutheran HospitalFort Wayne, IndianaUnited States
University of Iowa Hospitals & ClinicsIowa City, IowaUnited States
Great Lakes Neurosurgical; Spectrum Health East CampusGrand Rapids, MichiganUnited States
Adams Neurosurgery; Mid Michigan Medical CenterSaginaw, MichiganUnited States
Henry Ford HospitalWest Bloomfield, MichiganUnited States
The Orthopedic Center of St. Louis; Barnes Jewish West County HospitalChesterfield, MissouriUnited States
Montana Neuro Science Institute; St. Patrick's Medical CenterMissoula, MontanaUnited States
University at Buffalo Neurosurgery, Inc. Kaleida Health-Buffalo General Medical center/Gates Vascular InstituteBuffalo, New YorkUnited States
Buffalo Neurosurgery GroupWest Seneca, New YorkUnited States
Crystal Clinic, Inc.; Akron General Medical CenterAkron, OhioUnited States
Central Ohio Neurological Surgeons; Mt. Carmel East HospitalWesterville, OhioUnited States
The Center Orthopaedic & Neurosurgical Care & ResearchBend, OregonUnited States
OAA Orthopaedic SpecialistsAllentown, PennsylvaniaUnited States
Allegheny Neurosurgery; Washington HospitalPittsburgh, PennsylvaniaUnited States
Lexington Brain and Spine InstituteWest Columbia, South CarolinaUnited States
Center for Sports Medicine and Orthopaedics; Memorial HospitalChattanooga, TennesseeUnited States
East Tennessee Brain & Spine Center, Johnson City Medical CenterJohnson City, TennesseeUnited States
Central Texas Spine Institute; Health South Surgical CenterAustin, TexasUnited States
Virginia Brain and Spine; Winchester Medical CenterWinchester, VirginiaUnited States
West Virginia University; Ruby Memorial Hospital, WVU Hospitals, Inc.Morgantown, West VirginiaUnited States

+Publications

  • Results publication: Gornet MF, Lanman TH, Burkus JK, Hodges SD, McConnell JR, Dryer RF, Schranck FW, Copay AG. One-Level Versus 2-Level Treatment With Cervical Disc Arthroplasty or Fusion: Outcomes Up to 7 Years. Int J Spine Surg. 2019 Dec 31;13(6):551-560. doi: 10.14444/6076. eCollection 2019 Dec. PMID 31970051
  • Results publication: Gornet MF, Lanman TH, Burkus JK, Dryer RF, McConnell JR, Hodges SD, Schranck FW. Two-level cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: 10-year outcomes of a prospective, randomized investigational device exemption clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019 Jun 21;31(4):508-518. doi: 10.3171/2019.4.SPINE19157. Print 2019 Oct 1. PMID 31226684
  • Results publication: Lanman TH, Burkus JK, Dryer RG, Gornet MF, McConnell J, Hodges SD. Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of the Prestige LP artificial cervical disc replacement at 2 levels: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017 Jul;27(1):7-19. doi: 10.3171/2016.11.SPINE16746. Epub 2017 Apr 7. PMID 28387616
  • Results publication: Gornet MF, Lanman TH, Burkus JK, Hodges SD, McConnell JR, Dryer RF, Copay AG, Nian H, Harrell FE Jr. Cervical disc arthroplasty with the Prestige LP disc versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, at 2 levels: results of a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial at 24 months. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017 Jun;26(6):653-667. doi: 10.3171/2016.10.SPINE16264. Epub 2017 Mar 17. PMID 28304237

+Investigators