{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,21]],"date-time":"2026-03-21T09:13:37Z","timestamp":1774084417422,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":35,"publisher":"Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)","issue":"4","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2016,5]]},"abstract":"\n Study Design:<\/jats:title>\n Retrospective study.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Objective:<\/jats:title>\n To determine the short-term clinical succesrate of the M6-C cervical disk prosthesis in primary and secondary surgery.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Summary of Background Data:<\/jats:title>\n Cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) provides an alternative to anterior cervical decompression and fusion for the treatment of spondylotic radiculopathy or myelopathy. The prevention of adjacent segment disease (ASD), a possible complication of anterior cervical decompression and fusion, is its most cited\u2014although unproven\u2014benefit. Unlike older arthroplasty devices that rely on a ball-and-socket\u2013type design, the M6-C cervical disk prosthesis represents a new generation of unconstrained implants, developed to achieve better restoration of natural segmental biomechanics. This device should therefore optimize clinical performance of CDA and reduce ASD.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Materials and Methods:<\/jats:title>\n All patients had preoperative computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging and postoperative x-rays. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Neck Disability Index, a Visual Analog Scale, and the SF-36 questionnaire. Patients were asked about overall satisfaction and whether they would have the surgery again.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Results:<\/jats:title>\n Thirty-three patients were evaluated 17.1 months after surgery, on average. Nine patients had a history of cervical interventions. Results for Neck Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale, and SF-36 were significantly better among patients who had undergone primary surgery. In this group, 87.5% of patients reported a good or excellent result and 91.7% would have the procedure again. In contrast, all 4 device-related complications occurred in the small group of patients who had secondary surgery.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Conclusions:<\/jats:title>\n The M6-C prosthesis appears to be a valuable addition to the CDA armatorium. It generates very good results in patients undergoing primary surgery, although its use in secondary surgery should be avoided. Longer follow-up is needed to determine to what measure this device can prevent ASD.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1097\/bsd.0000000000000025","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2013,10,17]],"date-time":"2013-10-17T08:41:12Z","timestamp":1381999272000},"page":"E182-E187","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":27,"title":["The M6-C Cervical Disk Prosthesis"],"prefix":"10.1097","volume":"29","author":[{"given":"Sam","family":"Thomas","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Orthopaedic Surgery"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Karel","family":"Willems","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Orthopaedic Surgery"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Luc","family":"Van den Daelen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Orthopaedic Surgery"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Patrick","family":"Linden","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Physiotherapy, Stedelijk Ziekenhuis Roeselare, Roeselare"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Maria-Cristina","family":"Ciocci","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Electronics and Information Technology (ELIT), University College West Flanders, Ugent, Kortrijk, Belgium"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Philippe","family":"Bocher","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Electronics and Information Technology (ELIT), University College West Flanders, Ugent, Kortrijk, Belgium"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"276","reference":[{"key":"R1-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"195","DOI":"10.1080\/02688690701790605","article-title":"Adjacent segment disease after fusion for cervical spondylosis; myth or reality","volume":"22","author":"Moonsang","year":"2008","journal-title":"Br J Neurosurg"},{"key":"R2-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.3171\/2010.3.FOCUS1032","article-title":"A systematic review of randomized trials on the effect of cervical disc arthroplasty on reducing adjacent-level degeneration","volume":"28","author":"Botelho","year":"2010","journal-title":"Neurosurg Focus"},{"key":"R3-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"47","DOI":"10.1053\/j.semss.2006.03.005","article-title":"Patient selection for cervical disc arthroplasty","volume":"18","author":"Brown","year":"2006","journal-title":"Semin Spine Surg"},{"key":"R4-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"711","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2007.06.018","article-title":"The prevalence of indications and contraindications to cervical total disc replacement","volume":"8","author":"Auerbach","year":"2008","journal-title":"Spine J"},{"key":"R5-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2","DOI":"10.1053\/j.semss.2011.11.002","article-title":"The argument for anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion over total disc replacement","volume":"24","author":"Smith","year":"2012","journal-title":"Semin Spine Surg"},{"key":"R6-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S27","DOI":"10.1097\/01.brs.0000175192.55139.69","article-title":"Cervical disc replacement","volume":"30","author":"Philips","year":"2005","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R7-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1043","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2010.08.014","article-title":"Total disc arthroplasty does not affect the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical spine: results of 93 patients in three prospective randomized clinical trials","volume":"10","author":"Jawahar","year":"2010","journal-title":"Spine J"},{"key":"R8-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"432","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-011-1974-4","article-title":"Cervical disc prosthesis versus arthrodesis using one-level, hybrid and two-level constructs: an in vitro investigation","volume":"21","author":"Barrey","year":"2012","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"key":"R9-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"E1126","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0b013e31820e3dd1","article-title":"Finite element modeling of kinematic and load transmission alterations due to cervical intervertel disc replacement","volume":"36","author":"Womack","year":"2011","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R10-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2431","DOI":"10.1097\/00007632-200211150-00003","article-title":"Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion","volume":"27","author":"Eck","year":"2002","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R11-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1165","DOI":"10.1097\/01.brs.0000162441.23824.95","article-title":"Adjacent level intradiscal pressure and segmental kinematics following a cervical total disc arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model","volume":"30","author":"Dmitriev","year":"2005","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R12-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"33","DOI":"10.3171\/SPI-07\/07\/033","article-title":"Changes in adjacent-level disc pressure and facet joint force after cervical arthroplasty compared with cervical discectomy and fusion","volume":"7","author":"Chang","year":"2007","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"R13-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"441","DOI":"10.1097\/00024720-200310000-00002","article-title":"Internal stress distribution in cervical intervertebral discs: the influence of an artificial cervical joint and simulated anterior interbody fusion","volume":"16","author":"Wigfield","year":"2003","journal-title":"J Spinal Disord Tech"},{"key":"R14-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"226","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clinbiomech.2011.09.014","article-title":"Adjacent level effects of bi level disc replacement, bi level fusion and disc replacement plus fusion in cervical spine- a finite element based study","volume":"27","author":"Faizan","year":"2012","journal-title":"Clin Biomech"},{"key":"R15-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"519","DOI":"10.2106\/00004623-199904000-00009","article-title":"Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis","volume":"81-A","author":"Hilibrand","year":"1999","journal-title":"JBJS"},{"key":"R16-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"79","DOI":"10.1097\/00024720-200404000-00001","article-title":"Long-term follow-up after Interbody fusion of the cervical spine","volume":"17","author":"Goffin","year":"2004","journal-title":"J Spinal Disord Tech"},{"key":"R17-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S403","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-011-1916-1","article-title":"Adjacent-level degeneration after cervical disc arthroplasty versus fusion","volume":"20","author":"Maldonado","year":"2011","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"key":"R18-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"840","DOI":"10.1097\/00006123-200209000-00048","article-title":"Preliminary clinical experience with the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis","volume":"51","author":"Goffin","year":"2002","journal-title":"Neurosurgery"},{"key":"R19-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S618","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-010-1575-7","article-title":"Primary and coupled motions after cervical total disc replacement using a compressible six-degree-of-freedom prosthesis","volume":"21","author":"Patwardhan","year":"2012","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"key":"R20-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"71","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijsp.2012.02.001","article-title":"Cervical total disc replacement using a novel compressible prosthesis: results from a prospective Food and Drug Administration\u2013regulated feasibility study with 24-month follow-up","volume":"6","author":"Lauryssen","year":"2012","journal-title":"IJSS"},{"key":"R21-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"9","DOI":"10.1016\/j.esas.2010.01.002","article-title":"Initial clinical experience with a next-generation artificial disc for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative cervical radiculopathy","volume":"4","author":"Reyes-Sanchez","year":"2010","journal-title":"SAS J"},{"key":"R22-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"400","DOI":"10.2519\/jospt.2009.2930","article-title":"Measurement properties of the Neck Disability Index: a systematic review","volume":"39","author":"Macdermid","year":"2009","journal-title":"J Orthop Sports Phys Ther"},{"key":"R23-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3130","DOI":"10.1097\/00007632-200012150-00008","article-title":"SF-36 health survey update","volume":"25","author":"Ware","year":"2000","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R24-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"963","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clineuro.2008.06.001","article-title":"Comparison of biomechanical properties of cervical artificial disc prosthesis: a review","volume":"110","author":"Bartels","year":"2008","journal-title":"Clin Neurol Neurosurg"},{"key":"R25-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"384","DOI":"10.1097\/00024720-200308000-00010","article-title":"Classification of heterotopic ossification (HO) in artificial disk replacement","volume":"16","author":"McAfee","year":"2003","journal-title":"J Spinal Disord Tech"},{"key":"R26-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"299","DOI":"10.3171\/2010.3.SPINE09445","article-title":"Radiological changes of the operated and adjacent segments following cervical arthroplasty after a minimum 24-month follow-up: comparison between the Bryan and Prodisc-C devices","volume":"13","author":"Ryu","year":"2010","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"R27-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2802","DOI":"10.1097\/01.brs.0000245852.70594.d5","article-title":"Heterotopic ossification in total cervical artificial disc replacement","volume":"31","author":"Mehren","year":"2006","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R28-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"198","DOI":"10.3171\/spi.2007.6.3.198","article-title":"Clinical and radiographic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial","volume":"6","author":"Mummaneni","year":"2007","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"R29-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"348","DOI":"10.3171\/2011.5.SPINE10769","article-title":"Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kineflex C artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up","volume":"15","author":"Coric","year":"2011","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"R30-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"275","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2008.05.006","article-title":"Results of the prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-C total disc replacement versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of 1-level symptomatic cervical disc disease","volume":"9","author":"Murrey","year":"2009","journal-title":"Spine J"},{"key":"R31-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"101","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0b013e31818ee263","article-title":"Comparison of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion","volume":"34","author":"Heller","year":"2009","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R32-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1684","DOI":"10.2106\/JBJS.J.00476","article-title":"Results of cervical arthroplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: four-year clinical outcomes in a prospective, randomized controlled trial","volume":"93","author":"Sasso","year":"2011","journal-title":"JBJS Am"},{"key":"R33-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"631","DOI":"10.5435\/00124635-201010000-00006","article-title":"Cervical disc arthroplasty","volume":"18","author":"Zindrick","year":"2010","journal-title":"JAAOS"},{"key":"R34-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"445","DOI":"10.4103\/0028-3886.22611","article-title":"Artificial cervical disc replacement: principles, types and techniques","volume":"53","author":"Sekhon","year":"2005","journal-title":"Neurol India"},{"key":"R35-20230831","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"334","DOI":"10.1097\/BSD.0b013e3181fbf8aa","article-title":"ProDisc-C: an in vivo kinematic study","volume":"24","author":"Duggal","year":"2011","journal-title":"J Spinal Disord Tech"}],"container-title":["Clinical Spine Surgery: A Spine Publication"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.lww.com\/01933606-201605000-00011","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,8,31]],"date-time":"2023-08-31T18:20:52Z","timestamp":1693506052000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.lww.com\/01933606-201605000-00011"}},"subtitle":["First Clinical Experience in 33 Patients"],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2016,5]]},"references-count":35,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2016]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/bsd.0000000000000025","relation":{},"ISSN":["2380-0186"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2380-0186","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2016,5]]}}}