Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 24, 2025
Multilevel Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Degenerative Lumbar Disc Disease with Instability
Published on: July 25, 2025
Long-term outcomes following lumbar total disc replacement with M6-L
Charlie R Faulks1, Dean T Biddau1, Vincent J Rossi1,2,3
1Neuroscience Institute, Epworth Hospital, Richmond, Melbourne, Australia.
Background:
The motion preserving benefits of lumbar total disc replacement (LTDR) are well established. There is a paucity of long-term follow-up data on the M6-L prosthesis. The aim was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients undergoing LTDR with M6-L and make comment about its effectiveness and durability.
Methods:
A retrospective single center chart review was performed of all patients who underwent LTDR with M6-L between January 1, 2011, and January 1, 2021, either as standalone device or combined with a caudal anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) (hybrid procedure). Preoperative, postoperative, and final follow-up patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) (VAS back, VAS leg, ODI, and SF-12) and patient satisfaction were recorded prospectively. Device range of motion (ROM), adjacent segment degeneration/disease and heterotopic ossification (HO) were obtained from flexion and extension lumbar radiographs at most recent follow-up.
Results:
Sixty patients underwent LTDR with the M6-L device. Mean age was 41 [16-71] years and 38 (63%) were male. Sixteen (26.7%) underwent standalone LTDR, 42 (70.0%) a hybrid procedure, and 2 (3.3%) a 3-level procedure. Twenty-three (38.3%) patients were lost to follow-up. Thirty-seven (61.7%) were followed for a mean of 4.3 [1-10] years with 36/37 reviewed at a minimum of 2-years and 13/37 followed for over 5-years. Only one patient with osteopenia needed index level revision LTDR surgery for subsidence requiring supplemental posterior instrumentation. There were no osteolysis induced device related failures. Thirty patients obtained long-term follow-up radiographic data. Six patients had adjacent segment degeneration; none required surgery for adjacent segment disease (ASD). Three patients presented with clinically significant HO (2 with McAfee class III, 1 with class IV). The average M6-L ROM was 8.6 degrees. Mean preoperative baseline PROMs demonstrated statistically significant improvements postoperatively and were sustained at last follow-up (P<0.05).
Conclusions:
Total disc replacement (TDR) with M6-L showed clinically significant improvement in PROMs that were sustained at long-term follow-up. There were no osteolysis induced device related failures. The device ROM was maintained and showed a downward trend over the 10-year study follow-up period. This paper demonstrated that the M6-L was an effective and durable arthroplasty device in this series.
