Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 21, 2026

Multilevel Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Degenerative Lumbar Disc Disease with Instability
Published on: July 25, 2025
Five-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial for Lumbar Artificial Discs in Single-level Degenerative Disc
James J Yue1, Rolando Garcia2, Scott Blumenthal3
1Frank H Netter School of Medicine, Quinnipiac University, COS, Hamden, CT.
Study Design:
A prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled, investigational device exemption (IDE) noninferiority trial.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to compare the 5-year safety and effectiveness of the activL Artificial Disc with Control Total Disc Replacement (TDR) systems (ProDisc-L or Charité) in the treatment of patients with symptomatic single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD).
Summary Of Background Data:
The activL Artificial Disc received Food and Drug Administration approval in 2015 based on 2-year follow-up data.
Methods:
Eligible patients presented with symptomatic, single-level, lumbar DDD who failed ≥6 months of nonsurgical management. At entry, 324 patients were randomly allocated (2 : 1) to treatment with activL (n = 218) or Control (n = 106, including n = 65 ProDisc-L and n = 41 Charité) TDR. At 5-year follow up, a total of 261 patients (176 activL patients and 85 Control patients) were available for analysis.
Results:
The primary composite endpoint at 5 years for activL patients was noninferior to Control TDR. Relative to baseline, reductions in back pain severity and improvements in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were maintained for both the activL and Control TDR groups through 5 years. The activL group showed significantly better range of motion for flexion-extension rotation, flexion-extension translation, and disc angle, compared with Control TDR. Freedom from a serious adverse event through 5 years was 64% in activL patients, 47% in Control patients (log-rank P = 0.0068). Freedom from index-level and adjacent-level reoperation was high for TDR patients, ranging between 94% and 99%, respectively.
Conclusion:
Long-term evidence supports lumbar total disc replacement as safe. The next-generation activL Artificial Disc is more effective at preserving range of motion than first-generation lumbar TDRs (ProDisc-L and Charité) and offers a higher safety profile. Other primary and secondary outcomes are similar between disc designs.
Level Of Evidence:
2.
Related Concept Videos
Design Example: Calculating Safe Diameter for Wind-Exposed Disc
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Trial and Error and Algorithm
Random Error
Random Variables
Uppercase letters such as X or Y denote a random variable. Lowercase letters like x or y denote the value of a random variable. If X is a random variable, then X is written in words, and x is given as a number.
For example, let X = the...

