A meta-analysis comparing the results of cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease

Cervical Disk Replacement With Discover Versus Fusion in a Single-Level Cervical Disk Disease: A Prospective Single-Center Randomized Trial With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective randomized study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcome after Discover arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients treated for symptomatic single-level cervical disk disease.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF is still the gold standard for surgical treatment of cervical spine degenerative disk disease. However, results of many studies suggest that it may cause degenerative changes at levels immediately above and below the fusion, known as adjacent segment degenerative disease. Cervical arthroplasty has recently been introduced as an alternative to standard procedure of ACDF. It showed decreased surgical morbidity, decreased complications from postoperative immobilization, and an earlier return to previous level of function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 105 consecutive patients with single-level cervical disk disease, producing radiculopathy and/or myelopathy were randomly divided into groups to undergo ACDF or Discover arthroplasty. All patients were evaluated with preoperative and postoperative serial radiographic studies and clinically, using Neck Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale and neurological status at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months.

RESULTS

The results of our study indicate that cervical arthroplasty using Discover Artificial Cervical Disc provides favorable clinical and radiologic outcomes in a follow-up period of 24 months. There has been significant improvement in clinical parameters, Visual Analog Scale and Neck Disability Index, at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months in arthroplasty group comparing to control group.

CONCLUSION

The Discover artificial cervical disc replacement offers favorable outcome compared with ACDF for a single-level cervical disk disease at short-term and long-term follow-up.

Development of a Remodeled Caspar Retractor and Its Application in the Measurement of Distractive Resistance in an In Vitro Anterior Cervical Distraction Model

STUDY DESIGN

In vitro biomechanical study of the cervical intervertebral distraction using a remodeled Caspar retractor.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the torques required for distraction to different heights in an in vitro C3-C4 anterior cervical distraction model using a remodeled Caspar retractor, focusing on the influence of the intervertebral disk, posterior longitudinal ligament (PLL), and ligamentum flavum (LF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

No previous studies have reported on the torques required for distraction to various heights or the factors resisting distraction in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

METHODS

Anterior cervical distractions at C3-C4 was performed in 6 cadaveric specimens using a remodeled Caspar retractor, under 4 conditions: A, before disk removal; B, after disk removal; C, after disk and PLL removal; and D, after disk and PLL removal and cutting of the LF. Distraction was performed for 5 teeth, and distractive torque of each tooth was recorded.

RESULTS

The torque increased with distraction height under all conditions. There was a sudden increase in torque at the fourth tooth under conditions B and C, but not D. Under condition A, distraction to the third tooth required 84.8±13.3 cN m. Under conditions B and C, distraction to the third tooth required <13 cN m, and further distraction required dramatically increased torque. Under condition D, no marked increase in torque was recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Distraction of the intervertebral space was much easier after disk removal. An intact LF caused a sudden marked increase in the force required for distraction, possibly indicating the point at which the LF was fully stretched. This increase in resistance may help to determine the optimal distraction height to avoid excessive stress to the endplate spacer. The remodeled Caspar retractor in the present study may provide a feasible and convenient method for intraoperative measurement of distractive resistance.

Indirect meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes of total cervical disc replacements with fusions for cervical degenerative disc disease

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and total cervical disc replacement (TDR) are considered effective treatments for patients with cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD). An indirect meta-analysis including 19 randomized controlled trials (5343 patients) was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes of ACDF with TDR. Primary outcomes including functional indicators (NDI [neck disability index] score, neurological success and patient satisfaction), secondary outcomes including surgical outcomes (operation time, blood loss and length of stay) and secondary surgical procedures (secondary surgery at an adjacent level, secondary surgery at the index level, secondary surgery at both levels, removal, reoperation, revision and supplemental fixation) were included in the study. TDR using the Bryan disc was associated with a greater improvement in NDI score than ACDF (MD = -5.574, 95% CrIs [credible intervals] -11.73--0.219). For neurological success, the Bryan (odds ratio [OR] = 0.559, 95% CrIs 0.323-0.955) and Prestige (OR = 0.474, 95% CrIs 0.319-0.700) discs were superior to ACDF. However, no differences in the patient satisfaction rate were shown between TDR and ACDF. For patients with CDDD, ACDF using allograft and a plate is most effective for determining the surgical parameters. Moreover, TDR using the ProDisc-C, Mobi-C, Prestige and Bryan discs are good choices for improving functional outcomes and reducing secondary surgeries.

Multilevel cervical disc replacement versus multilevel anterior discectomy and fusion: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cervical disc replacement (CDR) has been developed as an alternative surgical procedure to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. However, patients with multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (MCDDD) are common in our clinic. Multilevel CDR is less established compared with multilevel ACDF. This study aims to compare the outcomes and evaluate safety and efficacy of CDR versus ACDF for the treatment of MCDDD.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed for articles published up until August 2016. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective comparative studies associated with the use of CDR versus ACDF for the treatment of MCDDD were included in the current study. Two reviewers independently screened the articles and data following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 702 enrolled patients suffering from MCDDD were retrieved. Patients who underwent CDR had similar operative times, blood loss, Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores compared to patients who underwent ACDF. Patients who underwent CDR had greater overall motion of the cervical spine and the operated levels than patients who underwent ACDF. Patients who underwent CDR also had lower rates of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). The rate of adverse events was significantly lower in the CDR group.

CONCLUSION

CDR may be a safe and effective surgical strategy for the treatment of MCDDD. However, there is insufficient evidence to draw a strong conclusion due to relatively low-quality evidence. Future long-term, multicenter, randomized, and controlled studies are needed to validate the safety and efficacy of multilevel CDR.

Mid-term efficacy and safety of cervical disc arthroplasty versus fusion in cervical spondylosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) are the most commonly used procedures in cervical spondylosis. However, only a few published studies exist in the literature comparing these two operation types, particularly its mid-term efficacy and safety. Furthermore, in those studies, even large sample trials, when compared, have elicited controversial results, making it inconvenient for clinicians to refer to them. The aim of the present study was to clarify the advantages and shortcomings of the two procedures. Articles indexed in the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, China Biological Medicine and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases, as of March 2016, that met our criteria were searched. A total of 18 trials involving 3,040 patients were included in our final analysis. The most important results drawn from the present analysis were as follows: Insignificant differences were identified in the blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD)=6.23; 95% confidence intervals (CI), −0.85 to 13.32; P=0.08], surgical time [standardized mean difference (SMD)=0.40; 95% CI, −0.01 to 0.82; P=0.06], the time of hospital stay (SMD=0.05; 95% CI, −0.28 to 0.37; P=0.77) and the total complications rate [odds ratio (OR)=0.86; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.131; P=0.28] on a comparison of the two operation methods. By contrast, comparing CDA with ACDF, the CDA had higher Short Form survey (SF-36) scores (WMD=1.65; 95% CI, 0.61 to 2.69; P=0.002), a larger range of motion in the operation level (SMD=6.53; 95% CI, 3.89 to 9.17; P<0.0001), a higher rate of neurological improvement following the operation (OR=1.80; 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.52; P=0.0006), a lower Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score of neck pain (WMD= 0.16; 95% CI, −0.28 to 0.05; P=0.006) and arm pain (WMD= 0.12; 95% CI, −0.24 to −0.01; P=0.04). In addition, in the mid-term following the surgery, CDA had a lower Neck Disability Index (NDI; SMD=0.18; 95% CI, −0.28 to −0.07; P=0.001) and a lower reoperation rate of adjacent levels (OR=0.54; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.85; P=0.007) compared with ACDF. Taken together, these results suggested that CDA and ACDF are efficient and safe methods for dealing with cervical spondylosis. However, with respect to certain specific indicators, such as the reoperation rate of adjacent levels following surgery, the former has several advantages.

Discover cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in symptomatic cervical disc diseases: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Symptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD) is a common degenerative disease, and Discover artificial cervical disc, a new-generation nonconstrained artificial disk, has been developed and performed gradually to treat it. We performed this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety between Discover cervical disc arthroplasty (DCDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for SCDD.

METHODS

An exhaustive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials that compared DCDA with ACDF for patients suffering SCDD. A random-effect model was used. Results were reported as standardized mean difference or risk ratio with 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

Of 33 articles identified, six studies were included. Compared with ACDF, DCDA demonstrated shorter operation time (P < 0.0001), and better range of motion (ROM) at the operative level (P < 0.00001). But no significant differences were observed in blood loss, neck disability index (NDI) scores, neck and arm pain scores, Japanese orthopaedic association (JOA) scores, secondary surgery procedures and adverse events (P > 0.05). Subgroup analyses did not demonstrated significant differences.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, DCDA presented shorter operation time, and better ROM at the operative level. However, no significant differences were observed in blood loss, NDI scores, neck and arm pain scores, JOA scores, secondary surgery procedures and adverse events between the two groups. Additionally, more studies of high quality with mid- to long-term follow-up are required in future.

Serum Metal Concentrations in Patients With Titanium Ceramic Composite Cervical Disc Replacements

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE

The serum titanium (Ti) concentrations were examined in patients implanted with a PRESTIGE LP Cervical Disc System (Medtronic, Inc., Memphis, TN). The metal-on-metal disc with ball-in-trough articulation is made of titanium alloy/titanium carbide composite (Ti-6Al-4 V/TiC).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Cervical disc arthroplasty provides a motion-preserving treatment alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for degenerative cervical disc disease. The articulating surfaces have a tendency to generate in vivo wear in the form of insoluble particulates (debris) and soluble metal ions. Not much information is available on the long-term metal concentrations observed in cervical disc arthroplasty and how these compare with the metal concentrations in Ti-based posterior fixation devices and other joint replacement implants.

METHODS

Thirty patients were enrolled after strict exclusion criteria that included no previous permanent metal implants and no professional exposure to metal particles. High-resolution inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry was used to assay blood serum titanium concentrations preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 60, and 84 months after surgery. The detection limit for Ti was 0.2 ng/mL. The Friedman test was used to make longitudinal statistical comparisons.

RESULTS

The median serum Ti concentrations determined preoperatively, and at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 60, and 84 months were 0.10, 1.22, 1.15, 1.27, 1.21, 1.46, 1.34, and 1.42 ng/mL, respectively. The serum Ti concentrations at all postoperative time points were significantly higher than that at the preoperative time point (Friedman P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The long-term postoperative serum Ti concentrations were significantly higher than the preoperative concentrations. The observed serum Ti concentrations in this study are lower than the reported concentrations in patients receiving posterior spinal instrumentation and metal or ceramic-on-polyethylene hip prostheses with Ti-alloy based stems and acetabular components.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

A comparison of local bone graft with PEEK cage versus iliac bone graft used in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

OBJECTIVE

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a popular procedure for patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy, but few studies reported the clinical outcomes of cervical local bone graft with a PEEK cage used in it. This retrospective study was performed to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of using local bone graft with a PEEK cage versus iliac bone graft in ACDF.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 60 consecutive patients who underwent ACDF were evaluated from January 2010 to January 2013. Twenty-nine patients received ACDF with a PEEK cage combined with cervical local bone graft (local bone group) and 31 patients received ACDF with autologous tricortical iliac bone graft (iliac bone group). The intraoperative and perioperative complications of both groups were recorded. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were taken to calculate the ratio of interbody height to the disc height and the interbody bony fusion rate. The Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score and visual analogue scale (VAS) were used to estimate postoperative clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up duration was 25.0±3.8months in the local bone group and 24.4±3.4months in the iliac bone group (P=0.56). Although there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of blood loss (P=0.17), the length of surgery was significantly less in the local bone group comparing with that of iliac bone group (P=0.01). Postoperatively, VAS scores were significantly decreased, and JOA scores were improved in both groups. However, no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups at final follow up (P=0.45 and P=0.93). The disc space height and segmental interbody angle at the surgical segment were greater in local bone group than those in the iliac bone group (P<0.001 and P<0.001). The fusion rates were 93.1% in local bone group and 90.3% in the iliac bone group at last follow up (P=0.70). Perioperative complication rates in local bone group and iliac bone groups were 6.8% and 29%, respectively (P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this study, patients receiving ACDF with local bone graft combined with a PEEK cage had significant shorter operation time, lower perioperative complications rate, and better radiological results comparing with those with an iliac bone graft alone. It seems that the local bone graft with a PEEK cage appears to be a safe alternative to the iliac bone graft for ACDF.

[Impact of anterior cervical fusion surgeries on adjacent segments: a finite element analysis]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the changes in the range of motion (ROM) and stress of the intervertebral disc and facet joint of the adjacent segments following anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using finite element analysis.

METHODS

A three-dimensional finite element model of the lower cervical vertebrae was constructed and validated by comparing the ROM of the finite element model against the published data. After the validation of successful modeling, finite element models of ACDF and ACCF were constructed. The ROM and the stress of the intervertebral disc and facet joint of the adjacent segments were compared between the intact lower cervical vertebrae and the cervical vertebrae after ACDF and ACCF.

RESULTS

The ROM of the finite element model was consistent with the published data. The total ROM and the ROM of the fusion segments with ACDF and ACCF were significantly decreased compared with the intact cervical vertebrae. In the adjacent segments following ACDF and ACCF, the ROM the adjacent segments and the stress peak of the intervertebral disc and facet joint all increased obviously compared with those of intact cervical vertebrae.

CONCLUSION

After fusion surgeries, the total ROM of the cervical vertebrae decreases and the ROM of the adjacent segment increases. The stress peak of the intervertebral disc and facet joint of the adjacent segments also increases to significantly alter the physiological characteristics of the intact cervical vertebrae.

Complication and Reoperation Rates Following Surgical Management of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy in Medicare Beneficiaries

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective database review.

OBJECTIVE

To compare complication and reoperation rates after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), posterior cervical fusion (PCFs), and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) using a large national database of Medicare beneficiaries.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

CSM is the most common cause of myelopathy in patients over 55 years and is considered the most common cause of spinal cord dysfunction in the world. Surgical treatment includes ACDF, PCF, or ACCF procedures.

METHODS

The PearlDiver database (2005-2012) was utilized to determine revision rates after surgical treatment of CSM by one of the aforementioned surgical treatments. Specifically, 1 to 2 level ACDF, ACCF, and PCF and 3+ level PCF cohorts were included. Each cohort was stratified by the age of 65 years. Survivorship curves were graphed and compared.

RESULTS

Of the patients younger than 65 years of age, there were 10,557 patients treated with 1 to 2 level ACDF procedures, 1319 patients with 1 to 2 level PCF procedures, 1203 patients with 1 to 2 level ACCF procedures, and 2312 patients treated with 3+ level PCF procedures. Of the elderly patients, 24,310 patients were treated with 1 to 2 level ACDFs, 4776 with 1 to 2 level PCF procedures, 3109 with 1 to 2 level ACCFs, and 7760 with 3+ level PCFs. Patients younger than 65 years of age were significantly more likely to have a reoperation procedure, than those 65 years or older when analyzing ACCF, ACDF, and 3+ level PCF procedures. ACCFs were significantly more likely than ACDFs to require reoperation. Patients treated with PCF were consistently more likely to have nondysphagia-related complications than those treated with ACDF. Rates of transfusion, dysphagia, and hematoma/seroma formation were significantly increased with ACCF compared with ACDF within the elderly population.

CONCLUSION

The elderly are significantly less likely to have a revision surgery after surgical treatment for CSM. Patients treated with ACCF are more likely to need a revision than those treated with ACDF.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Cervical Disk Arthroplasty Versus Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion for the Treatment of 2-Level Cervical Spondylopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) compared with anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of 2-level cervical spondylopathy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

CDA has emerged as a potential alternative to ACDF in patients with cervical disk degeneration. But there are no published systematic reviews and meta-analyses comparing CDA with ACDF for the treatment of 2-level cervical spondylopathy.

METHODS

The Pubmed, Embase, Web of science, Scopus, and Cochrane library databases were searched comparing CDA to ACDF in patients with 2-level cervical spondylopathy. Outcome measures were neck disability index, visual analog scale (VAS) of arm and neck pain, range of movement (ROM) at C2-C7, functional segment unit ROM, ROM at the operated level, and incidence of radiologic changes at adjacent levels approximately 2 years after surgery, as well as operating time and incidence of surgery-related complications. Mean difference (MD), odds ratios (OR), and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Six studies involving 646 patients were included. There were no significant differences in neck disability index (MD, -1.53; 95% CI -3.80 to 0.73), VAS neck pain (MD, -0.19; 95% CI -0.71 to 0.33), and VAS arm pain (MD, -0.23; 95% CI -0.61 to 0.16) between 2-level CDA and 2-level ACDF cases. ROM at C2-C7 (MD, 15.82; 95% CI, 10.66-20.99), functional segment unit ROM (MD, 8.58; 95% CI, 7.93-9.23), and ROM at the operated level (MD, 9.54; 95% CI, 7.73-11.35) were greater, but the incidence of radiologic changes at adjacent levels (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.67) were lower, in 2-level CDA cases. In 2-level CDA cases, the operating time was longer (MD, 57.41; 95% CI, 24.67-90.14), but surgery-related complications rates (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30-0.74) was lower.

CONCLUSIONS

CDA may be a safe and effective alternative to ACDF for the treatment of 2-level cervical degenerative disease.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Cervical disc arthroplasty for symptomatic cervical disc disease: Traditional and Bayesian meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

OBJECTIVE

Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has been designed as a substitute for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in the treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease (CDD). Several researchers have compared CDA with ACDF for the treatment of symptomatic CDD; however, the findings of these studies are inconclusive. Using recently published evidence, this meta-analysis was conducted to further verify the benefits and harms of using CDA for treatment of symptomatic CDD.

METHODS

Relevant trials were identified by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Outcomes were reported as odds ratio or standardized mean difference. Both traditional frequentist and Bayesian approaches were used to synthesize evidence within random-effects models. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was applied to test the robustness of our findings and obtain more conservative estimates.

RESULTS

Nineteen trials were included. The findings of this meta-analysis demonstrated better overall, neck disability index (NDI), and neurological success; lower NDI and neck and arm pain scores; higher 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores; more patient satisfaction; greater range of motion at the operative level; and fewer secondary surgical procedures (all P < 0.05) in the CDA group compared with the ACDF group. CDA was not significantly different from ACDF in the rate of adverse events (P > 0.05). TSA of overall success suggested that the cumulative z-curve crossed both the conventional boundary and the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit, indicating sufficient and conclusive evidence had been ascertained.

CONCLUSIONS

For treating symptomatic CDD, CDA was superior to ACDF in terms of overall, NDI, and neurological success; NDI and neck and arm pain scores; SF-36 PCS and MCS scores; patient satisfaction; ROM at the operative level; and secondary surgical procedures rate. Additionally, there was no significant difference between CDA and ACDF in the rate of adverse events. However, as the CDA procedure is a relatively newer operative technique, long-term results and evaluation are necessary before CDA is routinely used in clinical practice.

Anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF): a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical approaches are usually required in cases of severe cervical disc disease. The traditional method of anterior cervical disc fusion (ACDF) has been associated with reduced local mobility and increased occurrence of adjacent segment disease. The newer method of anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA) relies upon artificial discs of various products. Current literature is inconsistent in the comparative performance of these methods with regards to clinical, radiological and patient outcomes.

METHODS

Electronic databases, including OVID Medline, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, were comprehensively searched to retrieve studies comparing the treatment outcomes of ACDF and ACDA. Baseline characteristics and outcome data were extracted from eligible articles.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty five articles were identified through the database searches, and after screening 28 studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 4,070 patients were included (2156 ACDA, 1914 ACDF). There was no significant difference between the two groups in operation time, blood loss during operation, long-term all-complication rate and reoperation rate at the level of injury. The ACDA group had significantly better neurological outcomes, as well as a significantly lower rate of adjacent segment diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with ACDF, the ACDA procedure is associated with improved reoperation rate and reduction in neurological deficits amongst previously demonstrated benefits. There is heterogeneity in ACDA devices; future studies are required to investigate the impact of this technique on treatment outcomes.

Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in symptomatic cervical degenerative disc diseases (CDDDs): an updated meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs)

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety in cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for treating cervical degenerative disc diseases (CDDDs).

METHODS

The authors searched RCTs in the electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, Embase, Springer Link, Web of Knowledge, OVID and Google Scholar) from their establishment to march 2016 without language restrictions. We also manually searched the reference lists of articles and reviews for possible relevant studies. Researches on CDA versus ACDF in CDDDs were selected in this meta-analysis. The quality of all studies was assessed and effective data was pooled for this meta-analysis. Outcome measurements were surgical parameters (operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay), clinical indexes [neck disability index (NDI), neurological success, range of motion (ROM), Visual Analogue Score (VAS)], complications [the number of adverse events, adjacent segment disease (ASD), and reoperation]. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias assessment were also performed, respectively. The meta-analysis was performed with software revman 5.3.

RESULTS

37 articles (20 RCTs) with a total 4004 patients (2212 in the CDA and 1792 in the ACDF) met inclusion criteria. Eight types of disc prostheses were used in the included studies. Patients were followed up for at least 2 years in all the studies. No statistically significant differences were found between CDA and ACDF for blood loss [SMD -0.02; 95 % CI (-0.20, 0.17)], length of hospital stay [MD -0.06; 95 % CI (-0.19, 0.06)]. Statistical differences were found between operative time [MD 14.22; 95 % CI (6.73, 21.71)], NDI [SMD -0.27; 95 % CI (-0.43, -0.10)], neurological success [RR 1.13; 95 % CI (1.08, 1.18)], ROM [MD 6.72; 95 % CI (5.72, 7.71)], VAS of neck [SMD -0.40; 95 % CI (-0.75, -0.04)], VAS of arm [SMD -0.55; 95 % CI (-1.04, -0.06)], the rate of adverse events [RR 0.72 95 % CI (0.53, 0.96)], the rate of ASD [RR 0.62; 95 % CI (0.43, 0.88)], and reoperation [RR 0.50; 95 % CI (0.39, 0.63)]. Subgroup analysis stratified by different types of disc prostheses was also performed.

CONCLUSIONS

CDA is associated with higher clinical indexes and fewer complications than ACDF, indicating that it is a safe and effective treatment for CDDDs. However, the operative time of CDA is longer than ACDF. Because of some limitations, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Additional studies are needed. Large, definitive RCTs are needed.

Cervical radiculopathy

Cervical radiculopathy is a common clinical scenario. Patients with radiculopathy typically present with neck pain, arm pain, or both. We review the epidemiology of cervical radiculopathy and discuss the diagnosis of this condition. This includes an overview of the pertinent findings on the patient history and physical examination. We also discuss relevant clinical syndromes that must be considered in the differential diagnosis including peripheral nerve entrapment syndromes and shoulder pathology. The natural history of cervical radiculopathy is reviewed and options for management are discussed. These options include conservative management, non-operative modalities such as physical therapy, steroid injections, and operative intervention. While the exact indications for surgical intervention have not yet been elucidated, we provide an overview of the available literature regarding indications and discuss the timing of intervention. The surgical outcomes of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF), cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA), and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) are discussed.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) versus cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) for two contiguous levels cervical disc degenerative disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been considered as a gold standard for symptomatic cervical disc degeneration (CDD), which may result in progressive degeneration of the adjacent segments. The artificial cervical disc was designed to reduce the number of lesions in the adjacent segments. Clinical studies have demonstrated equivalence of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in single segment cervical disc degeneration. But for two contiguous levels cervical disc degeneration (CDD), which kind of treatment method is better is controversial.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical effects requiring surgical intervention between anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) at two contiguous levels cervical disc degeneration.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search in multiple databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EBSCO and EMBASE. We identified that six reports meet inclusion criteria. Two independent reviewers performed the data extraction from archives. Data analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, six papers were included in meta-analyses. The overall sample size at baseline was 650 patients (317 in the TDR group and 333 in the ACDF group). The results of the meta-analysis indicated that the CDA patients had significant superiorities in mean blood loss (P < 0.00001, standard mean differences (SMD) = -0.85, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = -1.22 to -0.48); reoperation (P = 0.0009, risk ratio (RR) = 0.28, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 0.13-0.59), adjacent segment degeneration (P < 0.00001, risk ratio (RR) = 0.48, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 0.40-0.58) and Neck Disability Index (P = 0.002, SMD = 0.31, 95 % CI = 0.12-0.50). No significant difference was identified between the two groups regarding mean surgical time (P = 0.84, SMD = -0.04, 95 % CI = -0.40 to 0.32), neck and arm pain scores (P = 0.52, SMD = 0.06, 95 % CI = -0.13 to 0.25) reported on a visual analog scale and rate of postoperative complications [risk ratio (RR) = 0.79; 95 % CI = 0.50-1.25; P = 0.31]. The CDA group of sagittal range of motion (ROM) of the operated and adjacent levels, functional segment units (FSU) and C2-7 is superior to ACDF group by radiographic data of peroperation, postoperation and follow-up.

CONCLUSION

We can learn from this meta-analysis that the cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) group is equivalent and in some aspects has more significant clinical outcomes than the ACDF group at two contiguous levels CDD.

Bryan Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Treatment of Cervical Disc Diseases: A Meta-analysis of Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trials

STUDY DESIGN

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty (BCDA) as compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for treatment of cervical disc diseases (CDDs).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Previous meta-analyses focused on the comparison of effectiveness and safety between ACDF and CDA, which consisted of various types of disc prostheses. No meta-analysis has been conducted up to present to compare ACDF with a specialized type of artificial cervical disc.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails for prospective RCTs that compared BCDA with ACDF. The retrieved results were last updated on October 1, 2015, without language restrictions. We classified the trials into subgroups by short-term and midterm follow-up.

RESULTS

Eight relevant RCTs involving 1816 individuals were included in the meta-analysis. In overall-term follow-up, the clinical outcomes indicated that BCDA was superior to ACDF considering lower NDI scores (P = 0.0009), greater range of motion at the index level (P = 0.02), and fewer adverse events (P = 0.004), but inferior to ACDF considering operation time (P < 0.00001). There was no significant difference between two groups regarding blood loss (P = 0.43), length of hospital stay (P = 0.12), and secondary surgical procedures (P = 0.20).

CONCLUSION

BCDA presented better NDI improvement, greater range of motion at the index level, and fewer adverse events. However, the benefits of BCDA considering blood loss, length of hospital stay, and secondary surgical procedures are still incapable to be proved. More well design studies with longer term follow-up are needed to provide a better evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of the two procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

A Comparison of Zero-Profile Devices and Artificial Cervical Disks in Patients With 2 Noncontiguous Levels of Cervical Spondylosis

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective randomized and controlled study of 30 patients with 2 noncontiguous levels of cervical spondylosis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcome between zero-profile devices and artificial cervical disks for noncontiguous cervical spondylosis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Noncontiguous cervical spondylosis is an especial degenerative disease of the cervical spine. Some controversy exists over the choice of surgical procedure and fusion levels for it because of the viewpoint that the stress at levels adjacent to a fusion mass will increase. The increased stress will lead to the adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). According to the viewpoint, the intermediate segment will bear more stress after both superior and inferior segments' fusion. Cervical disk arthroplasty is an alternative to fusion because of its motion-preserving. Few comparative studies have been conducted on arthrodesis with zero-prolife devices and arthroplasty with artificial cervical disks for noncontiguous cervical spondylosis.

METHODS

Thirty patients with 2 noncontiguous levels of cervical spondylosis were enrolled and assigned to either group A (receiving arthroplasty using artificial cervical disks) and group Z (receiving arthrodesis using zero-profile devices). The clinical outcomes were assessed by the mean operative time, blood loss, Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, Neck Dysfunction Index (NDI), cervical lordosis, fusion rate, and complications.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 32.4 months. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the blood loss, JOA score, NDI score, and cervical lordosis except operative time. The mean operative time of group A was shorter than that of group Z. Both the 2 groups demonstrated a significant increase in JOA score, NDI score, and cervical lordosis. The fusion rate was 100% at 12 months postoperatively in group Z. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in complications except the ASD. Three patients had radiologic ASD at the final follow-up in group Z, and none in group A.

CONCLUSIONS

Both zero-prolife devices and artificial cervical disks are generally effective and safe in the treatment of 2 noncontiguous levels of cervical spondylosis. However, in view of occurrence of the radiologic ASD and operative time, we prefer to artificial cervical disks if indications are well controlled.

Mid- to Long-Term Outcomes of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Treatment of Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Eight Prospective Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the mid- to long-term outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of 1-level or 2-level symptomatic cervical disc disease.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials that reported mid- to long-term outcomes (at least 48 months) of CDA versus ACDF. All data were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3 software. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for dichotomous variables. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95%CIs were calculated for continuous variables. A random effect model was used for heterogeneous data; otherwise, a fixed effect model was used.

RESULTS

Eight prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were retrieved in this meta-analysis, including 1317 and 1051 patients in CDA and ACDF groups, respectively. Patients after an ACDF had a significantly lower rate of follow-up than that after CDA. Pooled analysis showed patients in CDA group achieved significantly higher rates of overall success, Neck Disability Index (NDI) success, neurological success and significantly lower rates of implant/surgery-related serious adverse events and secondary procedure compared with that in ACDF group. The long-term functional outcomes (NDI, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) neck and arm pain scores, the Short Form 36 Health Survey physical component score (SF-36 PCS)), patient satisfaction and recommendation, and the incidence of superior adjacent segment degeneration also favored patients in CDA group with statistical difference. Regarding inferior adjacent segment degeneration, patients in CDA group had a lower rate without statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that cervical disc arthroplasty was superior over anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease in terms of overall success, NDI success, neurological success, implant/surgery-related serious adverse events, secondary procedure, functional outcomes, patient satisfaction and recommendation, and superior adjacent segment degeneration.

A RCT comparing 7-year clinical outcomes of one level symptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD) following ProDisc-C total disc arthroplasty (TDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF)

PURPOSE

The objective of this trial was to compare the safety and efficacy of TDA using the ProDisc-C implant to ACDF in patients with single-level SCDD between C3 and C7.

METHODS

We report on the single-site results from a larger multicenter trial of 13 sites using an approved US Food and Drug Administration protocol (prospective, randomized controlled non-inferiority design). Patients were randomized one-to-one to either the ProDisc-C device or ACDF. All enrollees were evaluated pre- and post-operatively at regular intervals through month 84. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for neck and arm pain/intensity, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Short-Form 36 (SF-36), and satisfaction were assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients were randomized to each arm of the study. Nineteen additional patients received the ProDisc-C via continued access. NDI improved with the ProDisc-C more than with ACDF. Total range of motion was maintained with the ProDisc-C, but diminished with ACDF. Neck and arm pain improved more in the ProDisc-C than ACDF group. Patient satisfaction remained higher in the ProDisc-C group at 7 years. SF-36 scores were higher in the TDA group than ACDF group at 7 years; the difference was not clinically significant. Six additional operations (two at the same level; four at an adjacent level) were performed in the ACDF, but none in the ProDisc-C group.

CONCLUSIONS

The ProDisc-C implant appears to be safe and effective for the treatment of SCDD. Patients with the implant retained motion at the involved segment and had a lower reoperation rate than those with an ACDF.

Sequential alignment change of the cervical spine after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the lower cervical spine

PURPOSE

The cervical spine has a linear chain of correlation or reciprocal relationship regionally (within the cervical spine) and globally (head to whole spine). The purpose of this study was to assess the sequential alignment change of the regional and global cervical spine after two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) performed on the lower cervical spine.

METHODS

This study included 61 patients (mean age 56 ± 8.6 years; range 35-70 years) who underwent ACDF at C5-6-7 with a plate-cage construct and whose C-spine neutral lateral radiographs showed an identical degree of horizontal gaze (occipital slope) peri-operatively. We compared the change in cervical curvature from the occiput to C7 with the absolute value (slope angle) and relative value (between two different slopes). We also investigated the correlated change in multiple angular parameters according to the change in the occipital slope.

RESULTS

The occipital slope was significantly correlated with the value of the C1-slope (r = 0.33) and C2- slope (r = 0.51). The value of the center of the sellar turcica-C7 sagittal vertical axis (St-SVA) was very closely related to the C1-slope (r = -0.83), C2-slope (r = -0.8), C2-7 angle (r = -0.43), and C2-5 angle (r = -0.46). The amount of angular change at the surgical level (C5-7A) was 5.8° (2.9° -> 8.5°), and the sum of the change in the C5-slope and C7-slope was 6° (3.1° + 2.9°). In general, the C2-5 angle decreased about 3°, in proportion to the upward inclination of C5-slope (3.1°), because the C2-slope was fixed. However, patients who showed improvement in cervical alignment (greatly increased C5-7 lordosis or greatly decreased St-SVA after surgery) often had upper cervical slope change (C1-s and C2-s).

CONCLUSIONS

The ACDF procedure itself can induce regional slope change (C5-s and C7-s) directly at the surgical level and can also influence upper cervical slope change (C1-s and C2s) indirectly. Then the change in the upper cervical spine can induce a change in the St-CVA and spino-cranial angle (SCA).

Long Term Societal Costs of Anterior Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) versus Cervical Disc Arthroplasty (CDA) for Treatment of Cervical Radiculopathy

BACKGROUND

Current literature suggests that anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) have comparable clinical outcomes for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. Given similar outcomes, an understanding of differences in long-term societal costs can help guide resource utilization. The purpose of this study was to compare the relative long-term societal costs of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) to cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) for the treatment of single level cervical disc disease by considering upfront surgical costs, lost productivity, and risk of subsequent revision surgery.

METHODS

We completed an economic and decision analysis using a Markov model to evaluate the long-term societal costs of ACDF and CDA in a theoretical cohort of 45-65 year old patients with single level cervical disc disease who have failed nonoperative treatment.

RESULTS

The long-term societal costs for a 45-year old patient undergoing ACDF are $31,178 while long-term costs for CDA are $24,119. Long-term costs for CDA remain less expensive throughout the modeled age range of 45 to 65 years old. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that CDA remains less expensive than ACDF as long as annual reoperation rate remains below 10.5% annually.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on current data, CDA has lower long-term societal costs than ACDF for patients 45-65 years old by a substantial margin. Given reported reoperation rates of 2.5% for CDA, it is the preferred treatment for cervical radiculopathy from an economic perspective.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for noncontiguous cervical spondylotic myelopathy

BACKGROUND

Noncontiguous cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is a special degenerative disease because of the intermediate normal level or levels between supra and infraabnormal levels. Some controversy exists over the optimal procedure for two noncontiguous levels of CSM. The study was to evaluate the outcomes of the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with zero-profile devices for two noncontiguous levels of CSM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

17 consecutive patients with two noncontiguous levels of CSM operated between December 2009 and August 2012 were included in the study. There were 12 men and 5 women with a mean age of 60.7 years (range 45-75 years). Involved disc levels were C3/4 and C5/6 in 11 patients and C4/5 and C6/7 in six patients. Preoperative plain radiographs, computed tomography (CT) with 3-D reconstruction and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the cervical spine were taken in all patients. All radiographs were independently evaluated by 2 spine surgeons and 1 radiologist. The outcomes were assessed by the average operative time, blood loss, Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, improvement rate, neck dysfunction index (NDI), swallowing quality of life (SWAL-QOL) score, the cervical lordosis and complications.

RESULTS

The mean followup was 48.59 months (range 24-56 months). The average operative time and blood loss was 105.29 min and 136.47 ml, respectively. The preoperative JOA score was 8.35, which significantly increased to 13.7 at the final followup (P < 0.01). The NDI score was significantly decreased from preoperative 13.06 to postoperative 3.35 (P < 0.01). The operation also provided a significant increase in the cervical lordosis (P < 0.01) from preoperative 10.17° to postoperative 17.06°. The fusion rate was 94.1% at 6 months postoperatively, and 100% at 12 months after surgery. The mean SWAL-QOL score decreased from preoperative 68.06 to immediate postoperatively 65.65 and then increased to 67.65 at final followup. There was a statistically significant difference between preoperative and immediate postoperatively values (P < 0.05), but none between preoperative and at final followup (P > 0.05). Cerebrospinal fluid leak, dysphagia and radiological adjacent segment degeneration occurred in one patient, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The ACDF with zero-profile devices is generally effective and safe in treating two noncontiguous levels of CSM.

Hybrid Strategy of Two-Level Cervical Artificial Disc and Intervertebral Cage: Biomechanical Effects on Tissues and Implants

This numerical study aimed to evaluate tissue and implant responses to the hybrid surgery (HS) of cervical artificial disc replacement (C-ADR) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).Four hybrid strategies of two-level C-ADR and ACDF were compared in terms of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) and implant failure.The rotary C-ADR and semirigid ACDF have been extensively used in the multilevel treatment of cervical instability and degeneration, but the constrained mobility at the ACDF segments can induce postoperative ASD problems. Hybrid surgery of C-ADR and ACDF has been an alternative to provide the optimal tradeoff between surgical cost and ASD problems. The biomechanical effects of hybrid strategies warrant thorough investigation for the two-level instrumentation.Based on computed tomography imaging, a nonlinear C2-C7 model was developed and validated by cadaveric and numerical data. Four strategies of inserting the C-ADR and ACDF into the C4-C6 segments were systematically arranged as PP (2 peek cages), AA (2 artificial discs), PA, and AP. The biomechanical behavior of these 4 strategies was evaluated in terms of motion and stresses of discs, facet forces, stresses of C-ADR and ACDF, and C-ADR motion.The constrained mobility of the ACDF segment worsened the kinematic and mechanical demands of the adjacent segments and artificial discs. The C-ADR articulation provided higher mobility than the replaced disc of the intact construct, making it an effective buffer to accommodate the compensated mobility and load from the ACDF segment. Consequently, the ASD progression of the AA construct was most restricted, followed by the PA, AP, and PP construct.The PA strategy is a tradeoff to preserve mobility and reduce cost. The C-ADR of the PA construct preserves the mobility of the C5/C6 segment and shares the transferred motion and loads of the fused C4/C5 segment. The PA construct shows optimal biomechanical results for minimizing ASD and implant failure, whereas the AP strategy is only recommended when cranial degeneration is the major concern.

Polyurethane on titanium unconstrained disc arthroplasty versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc disease: a review of level I-II randomized clinical trials including clinical outcomes

PURPOSE

To contrast the clinical and radiologic outcomes and adverse events of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with a single cervical disc arthroplasty design, the polyurethane on titanium unconstrained cervical disc (PTUCD).

METHODS

This is a systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCT) with evidence level I-II reporting clinical outcomes. After a search on different databases including PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Ovid MEDLINE, a total of 10 RCTs out of 51 studies found were entered in the study. RTCs were searched from the earliest available records in 2005 to November 2014.

RESULTS

Out of a total of 1101 patients, 562 were randomly assigned into the PTUCD arthroplasty group and 539 into the ACDF group. The mean follow-up was 30.9 months. Patients undergoing arthroplasty had lower Neck Disability Index, and better SF-36 Physical component scores than ACDF patients. Patients with PTUCD arthroplasty had also less radiological degenerative changes at the upper adjacent level. Overall adverse events were twice more frequent in patients with ACDF. The rate of revision surgery including both adjacent and index level was slightly higher in patients with ACDF, showing no statistically significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

According to this review, PTUCD arthroplasty showed a global superiority to ACDF in clinical outcomes. The impact of both surgical techniques on the cervical spine (radiological spine deterioration and/or complications) was more severe in patients undergoing ACDF. However, the rate of revision surgeries at any cervical level was equivalent for ACDF and PTUCD arthroplasty.

Strategies to improve the credibility of meta-analyses in spine surgery: a systematic survey

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Meta-analyses are powerful tools that can synthesize existing research, inform clinical practice, and support evidence-based care. These studies have become increasingly popular in the spine surgery literature, but the rigor with which they are being conducted has not yet been evaluated.

PURPOSE

Our primary objectives were to evaluate the methodological quality (credibility) of spine surgery meta-analyses and to propose strategies to improve future research. Our secondary objectives were to evaluate completeness of reporting and identify factors associated with higher credibility and completeness of reporting.

STUDY DESIGN

This study is based on a systematic survey of meta-analyses.

OUTCOME MEASURES

We evaluated credibility according to the Users' Guide to the Medical Literature and completeness of reporting according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library, and two reviewers independently assessed eligibility, credibility, and completeness of reporting. We used multivariable linear regression to evaluate potential associations. Interrater agreement was quantified using kappa and intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficients.

RESULTS

We identified 132 eligible meta-analyses of spine surgery interventions. The mean credibility score was 3 of 7 (standard deviation [SD], 1.4; ICC, 0.86), with agreement for each item ranging from 0.54 (moderate) to 0.83 (almost perfect). Clinical questions were judged as sensible in 125 (95%), searches were exhaustive in 102 (77%), and risk of bias assessments were undertaken in 91 (69%). Seven (5%) meta-analyses addressed possible explanations for heterogeneity using a priori subgroup hypotheses and 24 (18%) presented results that were immediately clinically applicable. Investigators undertook duplicate assessments of eligibility, risk of bias, and data extraction in 46 (35%) and rated overall confidence in the evidence in 24 (18%). Later publication year, increasing Journal Impact Factor, increasing number of databases, inclusion of Randomized Controlled Trials, and inclusion of non-English studies were significantly associated with higher credibility scores (p<.05). The mean score for reporting was 18 of 27 (SD, 4.4; ICC, 0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

The credibility of many current spine surgery meta-analyses is limited. Researchers can improve future meta-analyses by performing exhaustive literature searches, addressing possible explanations of heterogeneity, presenting results in a clinically useful manner, reproducibly selecting and assessing primary studies, addressing confidence in the pooled effect estimates, and adhering to guidelines for complete reporting.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: is surgical education safe?

BACKGROUND

Operative skills are key to neurosurgical resident training. They should be acquired in a structured manner and preferably starting early in residency. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the outcome and complication rate of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with or without instrumentation (ACDF(I)) is not inferior for supervised residents as compared to board-certified faculty neurosurgeons (BCFN).

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-center study of all consecutive patients undergoing ACDF(I)-surgery between January 2011 and August 2014. All procedures were dichotomized into two groups according to the surgeon's level of experience: teaching cases (postgraduate year (PGY)-2 to PGY-6 neurosurgical residents) and non-teaching cases operated by BCFN. The primary study endpoint was patients' clinical outcome 4 weeks after surgery, categorized into a binary responder and non-responder variable. Secondary endpoints were complications, need for re-do surgery, and clinical outcome until the last follow-up.

RESULTS

After exclusion of six cases because of incomplete data, a total of 287 ACDF(I) operations were enrolled into the study, of which 82 (29.2 %) were teaching cases and 199 (70.8 %) were non-teaching cases. Teaching cases required a longer operation time (131 min (95 % confidence interval (CI) 122-141 min) vs. 102 min (95-108 min; p < 0.0001) and were associated with a slightly higher estimated blood loss (84 ml (95 % CI 56-111 ml) vs. 57 ml (95 % CI 47-66 ml); p = 0.0017), while there was no difference in the rate of intraoperative complications (2.4 vs. 1.5 %; p = 0.631). Four weeks after surgery, 92.7 and 93 % of the patients had a positive response to surgery (p = 1.000), respectively. There was no difference in the postoperative complication rate (4.9 vs. 3.0 %; p = 0.307). Around 30 % of the study patients were followed up in outpatient clinics for more than once up until a mean period of 6.4 months (95 % CI 5.3-7.6 months). At the last follow-up, the clinical outcome was similar with a 90 % responder rate for both groups (p = 0.834). In total, five patients from the teaching group and eight patients from the non-teaching group required re-do surgery (p = 0.602).

CONCLUSIONS

Short- and mid-term outcomes and complication rates following microscopic ACDF(I) were comparable for patients operated on by supervised neurosurgical residents or by senior surgeons. Our data thus indicate that a structured neurosurgical education of operative skills does not lead to worse outcomes or increase the complication rates after ACDF(I). Confirmation of the results by a prospective study is desired.

Hybrid surgery versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical degenerative disc diseases: a meta-analysis

The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare hybrid surgery (HS) and cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for multilevel cervical degenerative disc diseases (DDD). Systematic searches of all published studies through March 2015 were identified from Cochrane Library, Medline, PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, CNKI, WANFANG DATA and CQVIP. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs involving HS and ACDF for multilevel DDD were included. All literature was searched and assessed by two independent reviewers according to the standard of Cochrane systematic review. Data of functional and radiological outcomes in two groups were pooled, which was then analyzed by RevMan 5.2 software. One RCT and four non-RCTs encompassing 160 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis revealed significant differences in blood loss (p = 0.005), postoperative C2–C7 ROM (p = 0.002), ROM of superior adjacent segment (p < 0.00001) and ROM of inferior adjacent segment (p = 0.0007) between the HS group and the ACDF group. No significant differences were found regarding operation time (p = 0.75), postoperative VAS (p = 0.18) and complications (p = 0.73) between the groups. Hybrid surgery demonstrated excellent clinical efficacy and radiological results. Postoperative C2–C7 ROM was closer to the physiological status. No decrease in the ROM of the adjacent segment was noted in the hybrid surgery group.

Quality of systematic reviews: an example of studies comparing artificial disc replacement with fusion in the cervical spine

Cervical artificial disc replacement (C-ADR) is now an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Many studies have evaluated the efficacy of C-ADR compared with ACDF. This led to a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses to evaluate the evidence of the superiority of one intervention against the other. The aim of the study presented here was to evaluate the quality of these reviews and meta-analyses. Medline via Ovid, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched using the keywords: (total disk replacement, prosthesis, implantation, discectomy, and arthroplasty) AND (cervical vertebrae, cervical spine, and spine) AND (systematic reviews, reviews, and meta-analysis). Screening and data extraction were conducted by two reviewers independently. Two reviewers then assessed the quality of the selected reviews and meta-analysis using 11-item AMSTAR score which is a validated measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Screening of full reports of 46 relevant abstracts resulted in the selection of 15 systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses as eligible for this study. The two reviewers' inter-rater agreement level was high as indicated by kappa of >0.72. The AMSTAR score of the reviews ranged from 3 to 11. Only one study (a Cochrane review) scored 100% (AMSTAR 11). Five studies scored below (AMSTAR 5) indicating low-quality reviews. The most significant drawbacks of reviews of a score below 5 were not using an extensive search strategy, failure to use the scientific quality of the included studies appropriately in formulating a conclusion, not assessing publication bias, and not reporting the excluded studies. With a significant exception of a Cochrane review, the methodological quality of systematic reviews evaluating the evidence of C-ADR versus ACDF has to be improved.

Factors that may affect outcome in cervical artificial disc replacement: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To identify the factors that may affect outcome in C-ADR and provide the pooled results of postoperative success rate of implanted segment range of motion (ROM), incidence of heterotopic ossification (HO), incidence of radiographic adjacent segment degeneration (r-ASD)/adjacent segment disease (ASD), and surgery rate for ASD.

METHODS

We systematically searched in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library and Web of knowledge from 2001 to May 2015. Two independent reviewers screened the primary records. Eleven questions regarding the effect of patient selection issues and radiographic parameters issues on outcome were posed previously. Studies addressing the framed questions were included for analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included for the final analysis. Results showed that number of surgical level (single versus double-level) had no effect on primary clinical outcome and radiographic outcome, surgical level had no effect on clinical and radiographic outcome, and smoking habits had negative effect on clinical outcome. No evidence for the effect of patient's age and pathology category (radiculopathy or myelopathy) on outcome was found. The overall success rate of ROM was 79.4%. ROM of the implanted segment and cervical sagittal alignment had no effects on clinical outcome. The pooled incidences of grade 1-4 HO and grade 3-4 HO were 27.7 and 7.8%, respectively. The pooled incidence of r-ASD and surgery rate for ASD were 42.4 and 3.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence showed that most of the pre-selected factors had no effect on outcome after C-ADR, and the ROM success rate, incidence of HO and r-ASD/ASD, and surgery rate for ASD are acceptable. There is a lack of evidence from RCTs for some factors.

Reoperation rates after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior cervical foraminotomy: a propensity-matched analysis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) are both used to surgically treat patients with cervical radiculopathy and have been shown to have similar outcomes. Nonetheless, ACDF has become increasingly more commonplace compared with PCF, in part because of a pervasive belief that PCF has a higher incidence of required reoperations.

PURPOSE

To determine the reoperation rate at the index level of ACDF versus PCF 2 years postoperatively.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective case-control.

PATIENT SAMPLE

All patients that underwent ACDF and PCF for radiculopathy (excluding myelopathy indications) between January 2005 and December 2011.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Revision surgery within 2 years, at the index level, was recorded.

METHODS

Propensity score analysis between the ACDF and PCF groups was done, matching for age, gender, race, body mass index, tobacco use, median income and insurance status, primary surgeon, level of surgery, surgery duration, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Seven hundred ninety patients met the inclusion/exclusion criteria, including 627 ACDF and 163 PCF. Before propensity matching, the PCF group was found to be significantly older and more likely to be male. After matching, there were no significant differences between groups for any baseline characteristics. Reoperation rate at the index level was 4.8% for the ACDF group and 6.4% for the PCF group (p=.7) within 2 years of the initial surgery. Using equivalence testing, based on an a priori null hypothesis that a clinically meaningful difference between the two groups would be ≥5%, we found that the absolute difference of 1.6% was significantly (p=.01) less than our hypothesized difference.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that even after accounting for patient demographics, operative characteristics, and primary surgeon, there are no significant differences in 2-year reoperation rates at the index level between ACDF and PCF. The reoperation rates are statistically equivalent. Thus, spine surgeons can operate via the posterior approach without putting patients at increased risk for revision surgery at the index level.

Postoperative segmental hypermobility after cervical arthroplasty: A possible pathomechanism for outcome failure

We present a 41-year-old man who underwent a cervical discarthroplasty (CDA) C5-6 procedure with an increase of the segmental range of motion from 2.8° to 6.9° and an increase in disc height from 5.8mm preoperatively to 10.4mm postoperatively with an unfavorable long-term clinical outcome. Both anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF), as well as CDA have been proven to be successful procedures in the management of cervical radiculopathy with good to excellent outcomes and low complication rates. The rationale for CDA over ACDF highlights the preservation of segmental motion and reduction of the incidence of adjacent segment disease. This case report suggests that a hypermobility syndrome and also an overcorrection of the cervical range of motion may be responsible for an unfavorable outcome after CDA.

Minimum 4-year outcomes of cervical total disc arthroplasty versus fusion: a meta-analysis based on prospective randomized controlled trials

The prevalence of cervical disc disease is high, and the traditional surgical method of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) carries with it the disadvantages of motion loss at the operated level, and accelerated adjacent level disc degeneration. Preliminary results of the efficacy and reoperative rate comparing TDA versus ACDF have been reported; however, the long-term outcomes of TDA versus ACDF still remain a topic of debate. This review was prepared following the standard procedures set forth by the Cochrane Collaboration organization, and preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA). The only studies included were randomized controlled trials with a minimum of 4 years of follow-up data. The meta-analysis included the neck disability index (NDI), visual analog scale (VAS) of neck and arm pain, SF-36 physical component scores (SF-36 PCS), over success, neurological success, work status, implant-related complications, and secondary surgery events. Four randomized controlled trials meet the inclusion criteria. The long-term improvement of NDI, VAS of neck and arm pain, SF-36 PCS, over success, and neurological success favored the TDA group. The TDA group also had a lower incidence of secondary surgery for both the index level (RR: 0.45 [0.28, 0.72]) and adjacent level (RR: 0.53 [0.33, 0.88]). In this meta-analysis of 4 included RCTs with a minimum 4 years of follow-ups, total disc arthroplasty showed improvements over ACDF as measured by the NDI, VAS of neck and arm pain, and SF-36 PCS.

Myelopathy is associated with increased all-cause morbidity and mortality following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a study of 5256 patients in American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP)

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether myelopathy is associated with increased morbidity and mortality after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) compared with other indications for this procedure.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF is the most common surgical procedure for the management of a spectrum of cervical spine pathologies. As a more advanced condition, myelopathy is generally thought to be associated with higher morbidity and mortality after this procedure, but there is limited evidence to support this supposition. The current study compares outcomes of ACDF procedures performed for myelopathy with those performed for other indications, controlling for other patient factors.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ACDF between 2010 and 2012 were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients with myelopathy were identified by diagnosis codes for cervical myelopathy. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed to compare 30-day adverse events and readmission between groups. Multivariate analyses controlled for patient and surgical characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 5256 ACDF procedures met inclusion criteria, of which 1425 (27.3%) were performed for cervical myelopathy. Patients with myelopathy were older and were less healthy than patients without myelopathy. Multivariate analysis controlling for baseline patient characteristics found that patients with myelopathy were at significantly increased risk of any adverse event (odds ratio = 1.5), any severe adverse event (odds ratio = 1.8), and death (odds ratio = 8.9) compared with patients without myelopathy.

CONCLUSION

After adjusting for baseline patient characteristics, not only were any adverse events and serious adverse events more common after ACDF for patients with myelopathy than for patients without myelopathy, but mortality was approximately 9 times more likely. It is important for surgical planning and patient counseling to keep this significant difference in mind for this common procedure that has different morbidities based on the pathology for which it is performed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Cervical total disc replacement is superior to anterior cervical decompression and fusion: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Despite being considered the standard surgical procedure for symptomatic cervical disc disease, anterior cervical decompression and fusion invariably accelerates adjacent segment degeneration. Cervical total disc replacement is a motion-preserving procedure developed as a substitute to fusion. Whether cervical total disc replacement is superior to fusion remains unclear.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and the Cochrane Library in accordance with the inclusion criteria to identify possible studies. The retrieved results were last updated on December 12, 2014. We classified the studies as short-term and midterm follow-up.

RESULTS

Nineteen randomized controlled trials involving 4516 cases were identified. Compared with anterior cervical decompression and fusion, cervical total disc replacement had better functional outcomes (neck disability index [NDI], NDI success, neurological success, neck pain scores reported on a numerical rating scale [NRS], visual analog scales scores and overall success), greater segmental motion at the index level, fewer adverse events and fewer secondary surgical procedures at the index and adjacent levels in short-term follow-up (P < 0.05). With midterm follow-up, the cervical total disc replacement group indicated superiority in the NDI, neurological success, pain assessment (NRS), and secondary surgical procedures at the index level (P < 0.05). The Short Form 36 (SF-36) and segmental motion at the adjacent level in the short-term follow-up showed no significant difference between the two procedures, as did the secondary surgical procedure rates at the adjacent level with midterm follow-up (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical total disc replacement presented favorable functional outcomes, fewer adverse events, and fewer secondary surgical procedures. The efficacy and safety of cervical total disc replacement are superior to those of fusion. Longer-term, multicenter studies are required for a better evaluation of the long-term efficacy and safety of the two procedures.

A comparison of propofol target controlled infusion-based and sevoflurane-based anesthesia in adults undergoing elective anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

The target controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol with fentanyl facilitates easy titration of the depth of anesthesia, and thereby may improve the quality of anesthesia. The aim of this study is to investigate if propofol TCI-based anesthesia is practical for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), one of the most common surgical interventions in spine procedures, when compared with sevoflurane-based anesthesia with respect to the quality of anesthesia. Patients were classified into two groups according to the anesthesia regimen of maintenance of anesthesia with fentanyl and either propofol TCI (group FP) or inhalational sevoflurane (group FS), respectively. The primary endpoint was to evaluate quality of anesthesia and extubation time. Secondary endpoints were hemodynamic stability during the operation, operative fentanyl consumption, and postoperative complications. The study results revealed there were comparable results on time to extubation, changes in intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, and the occurrence of postoperative complications between the groups. No differences in average length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and hospital stay were noticed. However, opioid consumption and blood loss during the operation for patients in group FP were significantly higher than those of patients in group FS (551.28 ± 193.98 vs. 446.86 ± 177.15 μg, p = 0.005; 52.06 ± 58.25 vs. 28.33 ± 40.74 mL, p = 0.019, respectively). In these adult patients undergoing ACDF, propofol TCI-based anesthesia appears to be as efficacious as sevoflurane-based anesthesia but consumed more fentanyl and experienced higher blood loss.

Incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical decompression and fusion meta-analysis of prospective studies

PURPOSE

To evaluate the incidence of adjacent segment disease (ASD) requiring surgical intervention between anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) and total disc replacement (TDR).

BACKGROUND

The concern for ASD has led to the development of motion-preserving technologies such as TDR. However, whether replacement arthroplasty in the spine achieves its primary patient-centered objective of lowering the frequency of adjacent segment degeneration is not verified yet.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Embase. These databases were thoroughly searched for prospective randomized studies comparing ACDF and TDR. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria for a meta-analysis and were used to report an overall rate of ASD for both ACDF and TDR.

RESULTS

Pooling data from 8 prospective studies, the overall sample size at baseline was 1,726 patients (889 in the TDR group and 837 in the ACDF group). The ACDF group had significantly more ASDs compared with the TDR group at 24 months postoperatively [odds ratios (OR), 1.31; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.04-1.64; p = 0.02]. The TDR group had significantly fewer adjacent segment reoperations compared with the ACDF group at 24 months postoperatively (OR, 0.49; 95 % CI, 0.25-0.96; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with one-level cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD), total disc replacement was found to have significantly fewer ASDs and reoperations compared with the ACDF. Cervical replacement arthroplasty may be superior to ACDF in ASD. Therefore, cervical arthroplasty is a safe and effective surgical procedure for treating CDDD. We suggest adopting TDR on a large scale.

Cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is the conventional surgical treatment for symptomatic cervical disc disease. Recently, cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has been developed to address some of the shortcomings associated with ACDF by preserving function of the motion segment. Controversy still surrounds regarding whether CDA is better.

METHODS

We systematically searched six electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Clinical, Ovid, BIOSIS and Cochrane registry of controlled clinical trials) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to April 2014 in which CDA was compared with ACDF for the treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease. Effective data were extracted after the assessment of methodological quality of the trials. Then, we performed the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eighteen relevant RCTs with a total of 4061 patients were included. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that CDA was superior to ACDF regarding better neurological success (P < 0.00001), greater motion preservation at the operated level (P < 0.00001), fewer secondary surgical procedures (P < 0.00001), and fewer rates of adverse events (P < 0.00001) but inferior to ACDF regarding operative times (P < 0.00001). No significant difference was identified between the two groups regarding blood loss (P = 0.87), lengths of hospital stay (P = 0.76), neck pain scores (P = 0.11) and arm pain scores (P = 0.78) reported on a visual analog scale.

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis revealed that CDA demonstrated superiorities in better neurological success, greater motion preservation at the operated level, lower rate of adverse events and fewer secondary surgical procedures compared with ACDF. However, the benefits of blood loss, lengths of hospital stay, neck and arm pain functional recovery are still unable to be proved.

Anterior cervical discectomy with arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical spondylosis

This meta-analysis aims to estimate the benefits and drawbacks associated with anterior cervical discectomy with arthroplasty (ACDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for cervical spondylosis. Of 3651 identified citations, 10 randomised controlled studies involving 2380 participants were included. Moderate quality evidence supports that patients in the ACDA group had: (1) a higher Neck Disability Index (NDI) success rate at 3 month (relative risk [RR]=0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78 to 0.93, p=0.0002) and 2 year follow-up (RR=0.95, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.00, p=0.04); (2) greater neurological success at 2 year follow-up (RR=0.95, 95%CI 0.92 to 0.98); and (3) were more likely to be employed within 6 weeks after surgery (RR=0.80 95%CI 0.66 to 0.96). In summary, the current evidence indicates that ACDA is associated with a higher NDI success rate in the short and long-term as well as a higher neurological success rate. Patients who undergo ACDA may also have a greater likelihood of being employed in the short-term. However, all of the evidence reviewed is of moderate or low quality and the clinical significance often marginal or unclear. Additional data are needed to compare the benefits and limitations of ACDA and ACDF.

Comparison of revision surgeries for one- to two-level cervical TDR and ACDF from 2002 to 2011

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Cervical total disc replacement (TDR) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) provide comparable outcomes for degenerative cervical pathology. However, revisions of these procedures are not well characterized.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to examine the rates, epidemiology, perioperative complications, and costs between the revision procedures and to compare these outcomes with those of primary cases.

STUDY DESIGN

This study is a retrospective database analysis.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 3,792 revision and 183,430 primary cases from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2002 to 2011 were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence of revision cases, patient demographics, length of stay (LOS), in-hospital costs, mortality, and perioperative complications.

METHODS

Patients who underwent revision for either one- to two-level cervical TDR or ACDF were identified. SPSS v.20 was used for statistical analysis with χ(2) test for categorical data and independent sample t test for continuous data. The relative risk for perioperative complications with revisions was calculated in comparison with primary cases using a 95% confidence interval. An alpha level of less than 0.05 denoted statistical significance.

RESULTS

There were 3,536 revision one- to two-level ACDFs and 256 revision cervical TDRs recorded in the NIS database from 2002 to 2011. The revision cervical TDR cohort demonstrated a significantly greater LOS (3.18 vs. 2.25, p<.001), cost ($16,998 vs. $15,222, p=.03), and incidence of perioperative wound infections (13.6 vs. 5.3 per 1,000, p<.001) compared with the ACDF revision cohort (p<.001). There were no differences in mortality between the revision surgical cohorts. Compared with primary cases, both revision cohorts demonstrated a significantly greater LOS and cost. Furthermore, patients who underwent revision demonstrated a greater incidence and risk for perioperative wound infections, hematomas, dysphagia, and neurologic complications relative to the primary procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated a significantly greater incidence of perioperative wound infection, LOS, and costs associated with a TDR revision compared with a revision ACDF. We propose that these differences are by virtue of the inherently more invasive nature of revising TDRs. In addition, compared with primary cases, revision procedures are associated with greater costs, LOS, and complications including wound infections, dysphagia, hematomas, and neurologic events. These additional risks must be considered before opting for a revision procedure.

ISASS Policy Statement - Cervical Artificial Disc

Morgan Lorio, MD, FACS, Chair, ISASS Task Force on Coding & Reimbursement

The ISASS Task Force reached out to Domagoj Coric, MD to provide a timely summation on cervical disc arthroplasty given his special interest and recent IASP championship of this innovative technology to insure enhanced spine patient access. The ISASS Task Force is pleased with this step towards published ISASS societal policy and applauds Dr. Coric's effort; if ISASS is to continue to succeed we must continually harness the voluntary talents and energies of our members with gratitude.

The Mobi-C cervical disc for one-level and two-level cervical disc replacement: a review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is a novel motion-preserving procedure that is an alternative to fusion. The Mobi-C disc prosthesis, one of many Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved devices for CDA, is the only FDA-approved prosthesis for two-level CDA. Hence, it may allow for improved outcomes compared with multilevel fusion procedures.

PURPOSE

To critically assess the available literature on CDA with the Mobi-C prosthesis, with a focus on two-level CDA.

METHODS

All clinical articles involving the Mobi-C disc prosthesis for CDA through September 1, 2014 were identified on Medline. Any paper that presented Mobi-C CDA clinical results was included. Study design, sample size, length of follow-up, use of statistical analysis, quality of life outcome scores, conflict of interest, and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included that investigated Mobi-C CDA, only one of which was a level Ib randomized control trial. All studies included showed non-inferiority of one-level Mobi-C CDA to one-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Only one study analyzed outcomes of one-level versus two-level Mobi-C CDA, and only one study analyzed two-level Mobi-C CDA versus two-level ACDF. In comparison with other cervical disc prostheses, the Mobi-C prosthesis is associated with higher rates of heterotopic ossification (HO). Studies with conflicts of interest reported lower rates of HO. Adjacent segment degeneration or disease, along with other complications, were not assessed in most studies.

CONCLUSION

One-level Mobi-C CDA is non-inferior, but not superior, to one-level ACDF for patients with cervical degenerative disc disease. The Mobi-C CDA procedure is associated with high rates of HO. Two-level Mobi-C CDA may be superior to two-level ACDF. However, insufficient evidence exists, thereby mandating a need for unbiased, well-designed prospective studies with well-defined outcomes in the future.

Clinical and radiographic evaluation of cervical disk replacement: a retrospective study

Studies have shown the effectiveness of cervical disk replacement. However, clinical outcomes, particularly by radiographic assessment during the 36-month follow-up visit, have not been reported for cervical disk replacement with Mobi-C (LDR, Austin, Texas) disk prostheses. A retrospective study was conducted at 10 centers across China and included 65 patients who underwent single-level Mobi-C disk prosthesis replacement from October 2009 to July 2010. Clinical and radiographic data were collected before replacement, 7 days postoperatively, and 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months postoperatively. Clinical and neurologic outcomes were assessed by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, visual analog scale (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Odom's criteria. Static and dynamic radiographs were measured to determine intervertebral height and range of motion (ROM) of the cervical spine, the functional spinal unit, the treated segment, and adjacent segments. JOA, VAS, and NDI scores showed statistically significant improvement 36 months after replacement (P<.05). The ROM of the cervical spine, functional spinal unit, treated segment, and adjacent segments did not show a significant difference before and after replacement (P>.05). The intervertebral height of the treated segment increased significantly, and the intervertebral height of adjacent segments showed no statistical significance between time points and at follow-up. Clinical outcomes indicated that Mobi-C artificial cervical disk replacement is reliable. Radiographic data showed that it plays a role in reconstruction or maintenance of intervertebral height and ROM of the cervical spine, functional spinal unit, treated segment, and adjacent segments after Mobi-C cervical disk replacement.

A prospective, randomised, controlled multicentre study comparing cervical disc replacement with anterior cervical decompression and fusion

PURPOSE

Total cervical artificial disc replacement (TDR) simulates normal disc structure, thus avoiding the drawbacks of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF). This prospective, randomized, controlled and multicentre study aimed to evaluate clinical and radiographic outcomes by comparing cervical disc replacement using Mobi-C disc prostheses with ACDF.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized, controlled and multicentre study consisted of 111 patients undergoing single-level Mobi-C disc prosthesis replacement (TDR group, n = 55) or ACDF (n = 56) from February 2008 to November 2009 at 11 medical centres across China. Patients were assessed before surgery, at seven days postoperation and one, three, six, 12, 24, 36 and 48 months postoperation. Clinical and neurological outcome was determined by measuring the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, visual analogue scale (VAS) and Neck Disability Index (NDI). Static and dynamic radiographs were obtained of the cervical curvature, the functional spinal unit (FSU) angle and range of motion (ROM) of the cervical spine, FSU angle and treated and adjacent segments.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients were included and randomly assigned to either Mobi-C disc prosthesis replacement or ACDF. JOA, VAS and NDI showed statistically significant improvements 48 months after surgery (P < 0.05). ROM, FSU angle, treated segment and adjacent segments in the Mobi-C group were not significantly different before and after replacement (p > 0.05). ROM in the ACDF group was significantly reduced at one month and remained so throughout the follow-up. By 48-months, more ACDF patients required secondary surgery (four of 56 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Although ACDF may increase the risk of additional surgery, clinical outcomes indicated that both Mobi-C artificial cervical disc replacement and ACDF were reliable. Radiographic data showed that ROM of the cervical spine, FSU angle and treated and adjacent segments were relatively better reconstructed and maintained in the Mobi-C group compared with those in the ACDF group.

Cervical arthroplasty: a critical review of the literature

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is a motion-preserving procedure that is an alternative to fusion. Proponents of arthroplasty assert that it will maintain cervical motion and prevent or reduce adjacent segment degeneration. Accordingly, CDA, compared with fusion, would have the potential to improve clinical outcomes. Published studies have varying conclusions on whether CDA reduces complications and/or improves outcomes. As many of these previous studies have been funded by CDA manufacturers, we wanted to ascertain whether there was a greater likelihood for these studies to report positive results.

PURPOSE

To critically assess the available literature on cervical arthroplasty with a focus on the time of publication and conflict of interest (COI).

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Review of the literature.

METHODS

All clinical articles about CDA published in English through August 1, 2013 were identified on Medline. Any article that presented CDA clinical results was included. Study design, sample size, type of disc, length of follow-up, use of statistical analysis, quality-of-life (QOL) outcome scores, COI, and complications were recorded. A meta-analysis was conducted stratifying studies by COI and publication date to identify differences in complication rates reported.

RESULTS

Seventy-four studies were included that investigated 8 types of disc prosthesis and 22 met the criteria for a randomized controlled trial (RCT). All Level Ib RCTs reported superior quality-of-life outcomes for CDA versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) at 24 months. Fifty of the 74 articles (68%) had a disclosure section, including all Level Ib RCTs, which had significant COIs related to the respective studies. Those studies without a COI reported mean weighted average adjacent segment disease rates of 6.3% with CDA and 6.2% with ACDF. In contrast, the reverse was reported by studies with a COI, for which the averages were 2.5% with CDA and 6.3% with ACDF. Those studies with a COI (n=31) had an overall weighted average heterotopic ossification rate of 22%, whereas those studies with no COI (n=43) had a rate of 46%.

CONCLUSIONS

Associated COIs did not influence QOL outcomes. Conflicts of interest were more likely to be present in studies published after 2008, and those with a COI reported greater adjacent segment disease rates for ACDF than CDA. In addition, heterotopic ossification rates were much lower in studies with COI versus those without COI. Thus, COIs did not affect QOL outcomes but were associated with lower complication rates.