Cervical disc arthroplasty for the treatment of adjacent segment disease: A systematic review of clinical evidence

2017 ◽  
Vol 162 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ting-kui Wu ◽  
Hao Liu ◽  
Ning Ning ◽  
Ying Hong ◽  
Ming-dan Deng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Evidence ◽  
Adjacent Segment Disease ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Disc Arthroplasty

Rate of Adjacent Segment Disease in Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Versus Single-Level Fusion

Spine ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (26) ◽  
pp. 2253-2257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kushagra Verma ◽  
Sapan D. Gandhi ◽  
Mitchell Maltenfort ◽  
Todd J. Albert ◽  
Alan S. Hilibrand ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adjacent Segment Disease ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Level Fusion

A systematic review of randomized trials on the effect of cervical disc arthroplasty on reducing adjacent-level degeneration

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. E5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo Vieira Botelho ◽  
Osmar José dos Santos Moraes ◽  
Gustavo Alberto Fernandes ◽  
Yuri dos Santos Buscariolli ◽  
Wanderley Marques Bernardo
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Adjacent Level ◽  
Cervical Arthroplasty ◽  
Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Adjacent Level Degeneration

Object Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion had been considered a safe and effective procedure for radiculopathy and myelopathy in the cervical spine, but degeneration in adjacent spinal levels has been a problem in some patients after fusion. Since 2002, cervical disc arthroplasty has been established as an alternative to fusion. The objective of this study was to review data concerning the role of cervical arthroplasty in reducing adjacent-level degeneration. Methods A systematic review was performed using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and LILACS databases, focusing on a structured question involving the population of interest, types of intervention, types of control, and outcomes studied. Results No study has specifically compared the results of arthroplasty with the results of fusion with respect to the rate of postoperative development of adjacent-segment degenerative disease. One paper described a rate for adjacent-level surgery. The level of evidence of that paper was classified 2b, and although its authors found a statistically significant between-groups difference (arthroplasty vs fusion) using log-rank analysis, re-analysis according to number needed to treat (in the current paper) did not reveal statistical significance. Conclusions Adjacent-level degeneration has not been adequately studied in a review of the available randomized controlled trials on this topic, and there is no clinical evidence of reduction in adjacent-level degeneration with the use of cervical arthroplasty.

Cervical Disc Arthroplasty is an Acceptable Treatment Option for Adjacent Segment Degeneration After Fusion

2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
DesRaj M. Clark ◽  
Bobby G. Yow ◽  
Andres S. Piscoya ◽  
William B. Roach ◽  
Scott C. Wagner
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Option ◽  
Adjacent Segment Degeneration ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Disc Arthroplasty

scholarly journals Adverse Events Following Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 178-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan C. Xu ◽  
Chandni Goel ◽  
Michael F. Shriver ◽  
Joseph E. Tanenbaum ◽  
Michael P. Steinmetz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Industry Funding ◽  
Quality Of Reporting ◽  
Cervical Arthroplasty ◽  
Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Vascular Compromise

Study Design: Systematic review. Objectives: Cervical arthroplasty is an increasingly popular treatment of cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. An understanding of the potential adverse events (AEs) is important to help both clinicians and patients. We sought to provide a comprehensive systematic review of the AEs reported in all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cervical disc arthroplasty in an attempt to characterize the quality of reporting. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE and Web of Science for RCTs of cervical disc arthroplasty reporting AEs. We reported the most frequently mentioned AEs, including dysphagia/dysphonia, vascular compromise, dural injury, and infections. We recorded the presence of industry funding and scored the quality of collection methods and reporting of AEs. Results: Of the 3734 identified articles, 29 articles met full inclusion criteria. The quality of AE reporting varied significantly between studies, and a combined meta-analysis was not feasible. The 29 articles covered separate 19 RCTs. Eight studies were US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational device exemption (IDE) trials. Rates were recorded for the following AEs: dysphagia/dysphonia (range = 1.3% to 27.2%), vascular compromise (range = 1.1% to 2.4%), cervical wound infection (range = 1.2% to 22.5%), and cerebrospinal fluid leak (range = 0.8% to 7.1%). Conclusions: There is a lack of consistency in reporting of AEs among RCTs of cervical arthroplasty. FDA IDE trials scored better in AE event reporting compared to other studies. Standardized definitions for AEs and standardized data collection methodology are needed to improve future studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document