Classification of heterotopic ossification (HO) in artificial disk replacement
- PMID: 12902954
- DOI: 10.1097/00024720-200308000-00010
Classification of heterotopic ossification (HO) in artificial disk replacement
Abstract
There is currently no structured classification system to quantitate heterotopic bone formation after artificial disk replacement procedures. The purpose of this work was to develop a method of classifying heterotopic bone formation that is reliable between investigators with different levels of training and easy to remember with only five gradations of severity. One hundred one radiographs of clinical patients and 17 microradiographs from nonhuman primates having undergone various types of disk replacement were classified by seven independent reviewers. The kappa statistics were calculated for interobserver variation between the seven participants with various levels of spinal training and the intraobserver error based on two assessments made at least 2 months apart. The interobserver reliability correlation coefficient for seven raters calculated using the intraclass kappa correlation coefficient and the Kish rho was r = 0.9683 (P < 0.0001). The intraobserver reliability based on readings at two time intervals at a minimum of 2 months apart was r = 0.8949 (P = 0.01). This classification of heterotopic ossification, periannular calcification, and ectopic bone formation associated with total disk arthroplasty proved to be highly reliable and reproducible.
Similar articles
-
Analysis of the incidence and clinical effect of the heterotopic ossification in a single-level cervical artificial disc replacement.Spine J. 2010 Aug;10(8):676-82. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.04.017. Spine J. 2010. PMID: 20537598
-
Computed Tomography Versus Simple Radiography for Detecting and Classifying Heterotopic Ossification after Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty.Clin Orthop Surg. 2024 Dec;16(6):962-970. doi: 10.4055/cios24071. Epub 2024 Oct 11. Clin Orthop Surg. 2024. PMID: 39618534 Free PMC article.
-
Heterotopic ossification after cervical total disc replacement: determination by CT and effects on clinical outcomes.J Neurosurg Spine. 2011 Apr;14(4):457-65. doi: 10.3171/2010.11.SPINE10444. Epub 2011 Feb 4. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011. PMID: 21294610
-
High prevalence of heterotopic ossification after cervical disc arthroplasty: outcome and intraoperative findings following explantation of 22 cervical disc prostheses.J Neurosurg Spine. 2012 Aug;17(2):141-6. doi: 10.3171/2012.4.SPINE12223. Epub 2012 Jun 1. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012. PMID: 22657947 Review.
-
Lumbar disc replacement.Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2006 Mar;10(1):22-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-934214. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2006. PMID: 16514578 Review.
Cited by
-
Complications and Complication Avoidance With Cervical Total Disc Replacement.Int J Spine Surg. 2020 Aug;14(s2):S50-S56. doi: 10.14444/7091. Int J Spine Surg. 2020. PMID: 32994306 Free PMC article.
-
Heterotopic ossification in vertebral interlaminar/interspinous instrumentation: report of a case.Case Rep Surg. 2012;2012:970642. doi: 10.1155/2012/970642. Epub 2012 Jul 24. Case Rep Surg. 2012. PMID: 22888459 Free PMC article.
-
Retrieval analysis of motion preserving spinal devices and periprosthetic tissues.SAS J. 2009 Dec 1;3(4):161-77. doi: 10.1016/j.esas.2009.11.003. eCollection 2009. SAS J. 2009. PMID: 25802641 Free PMC article.
-
Charité total disc replacement--clinical and radiographical results after an average follow-up of 17 years.Eur Spine J. 2006 Feb;15(2):183-95. doi: 10.1007/s00586-005-1022-3. Epub 2005 Oct 28. Eur Spine J. 2006. PMID: 16254716 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison between single- and multi-level patients: clinical and radiological outcomes 2 years after cervical disc replacement.Eur Spine J. 2011 Sep;20(9):1417-26. doi: 10.1007/s00586-011-1722-9. Epub 2011 Feb 20. Eur Spine J. 2011. PMID: 21336970 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical