Letter to the Editor concerning “Incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical decompression and fusion meta-analysis of prospective studies” by Luo et al. (2015) Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 135(2):155–60. doi:10.1007/s00402-014-2125-2

2016 ◽  
Vol 136 (5) ◽  
pp. 739-740
Author(s):  
Yan Hu ◽  
Guohua Lv
2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
DesRaj M. Clark ◽  
Bobby G. Yow ◽  
Andres S. Piscoya ◽  
William B. Roach ◽  
Scott C. Wagner

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul Basho ◽  
Kenneth A. Hood

Symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration of the cervical spine remains problematic for patients and surgeons alike. Despite advances in surgical techniques and instrumentation, the solution remains elusive. Spurred by the success of total joint arthroplasty in hips and knees, surgeons and industry have turned to motion preservation devices in the cervical spine. By preserving motion at the diseased level, the hope is that adjacent segment degeneration can be prevented. Multiple cervical disc arthroplasty devices have come onto the market and completed Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption trials. Though some of the early results demonstrate equivalency of arthroplasty to fusion, compelling evidence of benefits in terms of symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration are lacking. In addition, non-industry-sponsored studies indicate that these devices are equivalent to fusion in terms of adjacent segment degeneration. Longer-term studies will eventually provide the definitive answer.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document