Issue link: https://beckershealthcare.uberflip.com/i/1511473
19 EXECUTIVE BRIEFING 3 • Patient Satisfaction: Overall patient satisfaction was similar among activL and prodisc L patients (95.3% vs. 93.5%; p = 0.526). • Return to Work: activL had a shorter median return-to-work time than prodisc L (67 days vs. 74 days) that was not statistically significant (Figure 1). • Opioid Use: Opioid use significantly decreased over 7 years with both activL (64.7% to 0%; p < 0.01) and prodisc L (63.1% to 0%; p < 0.01. No patients were using opioids after six years. • Reoperation Rate: Reoperation rates with activL and prodisc L similarly were low over 7 years (p = 0.34 between groups). Over 95% (270/283) of activL and prodisc L patients were free from reoperations. • ROM: activL had significantly greater mean flexion-extension rotation than prodisc L (5.3 vs. 4.1; p = 0.0334). • Serious Adverse Events (SAEs): activL had significantly greater freedom from SAE than prodisc L (61.5% vs. 43.1%; p = 0.011) (Figure 1). Figure 1: ODI, VAS, Time to Return to Work, and Freedom from SAE from baseline to 7 years for activL and prodisc L Conclusion Symptomatic lumbar DDD is becoming more common as the general population ages. Approximately 6.8% of the North American population are diagnosed with lumbar DDD yearly. 22 Lumbar TDR is an effective way to treat lumbar DDD that preserves motion while shortening recovery and rehabilitation time. Lumbar TDR shows early and significant improvement in pain and impairment following recovery from surgery, and statistically significant improvements are maintained through 7-year follow-up. activL is more effective at preserving motion and has more favorable safety profile than prodisc L.