Cervical disc arthroplasty

Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons

Volumn 18, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 631-637

  Zindrick, Michael ^a   Harris, Mitchel B ^b   Humphreys, Steven Craig ^c   O'Leary, Patrick T ^d   Schneiderman, Gary ^e   Watters III, William C ^f   Turkelson, Charles M ^g   Wies, Janet L ^g   Raymond, Laura ^g  

^a Department of Orthopedic Surgery ^*  (United States)

^b BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c Center for Sports Medicine and Orthopaedics Chattanooga   (United States)

^d LOYOLA UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e Sutter Neuroscience Medical Group   (United States)

^f Bone and Joint Clinic of Houston   (United States)

^g American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77958104715     PISSN: 1067151X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5435/00124635-201010000-00006     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Cook DJ, Holbrook A, McAlister FA; Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group: Users' guides to the medical literature: XIX. Applying clinical trial results: A. How to use an article measuring the effect of an intervention on surrogate end points. JAMA 1999;282(8):771-778.
2. Rücker G, Schwarzer G, Carpenter J, Olkin I: Why add anything to nothing? The arcsine difference as a measure of treatment effect in meta-analysis with zero cells. Stat Med 2009;28(5):721-738.
3. Murrey D, Janssen M, Delamarter R, et al: Results of the prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-C total disc replacement versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of 1-level symptomatic cervical disc disease. Spine J 2009;9(4):275-286.
4. Heller JG, Sasso RC, Papadopoulos SM, et al: Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: Clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34(2):101-107.
5. Mummaneni PV, Burkus JK, Haid RW, Traynelis VC, Zdeblick TA: Clinical and radiographic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: A randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 2007;6(3):198-209.
6. Cheng L, Nie L, Zhang L, Hou Y: Fusion versus Bryan Cervical Disc in two-level cervical disc disease: A prospective, randomised study. Int Orthop 2008;33(5):1347-1351.
7. Nabhan A, Steudel WI, Nabhan A, Pape D, Ishak B: Segmental kinematics and adjacent level degeneration following disc replacement versus fusion: RCT with three years of follow-up. 7 Long Term EffMed Implants 2007;17(3):229-236.
8. Anderson PA, Sasso RC, Riew KD: Comparison of adverse events between the Bryan artificial cervical disc and anterior cervical arthrodesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2008;33(12):1305-1312.
9. Riew KD, Buchowski JM, Sasso R, Zdeblick T, Metcalf NH, Anderson PA: Cervical disc arthroplasty compared with arthrodesis for the treatment of myelopathy.} Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90(11):2354-2364.
10. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al; GRADE Working Group: Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004;328(7454): 1490.
11. Treadwell JR, Tregear SJ, Reston JT, Turkelson CM: A system for rating the stability and strength of medical evidence. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:52.
12. Grimes DA, Schulz KF: Surrogate end points in clinical research: Hazardous to your health. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105(5 pt 1):1114-1118.
13. Shaughnessy AF, Slawson DC: What happened to the valid POEMs? A survey of review articles on the treatment of type 2 diabetes. BMJ 2003;327(7409): 266.
14. Cleland JA, Fritz JM, Whitman JM, Palmer JA: The reliability and construct validity of the Neck Disability Index and patient specific functional scale in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31(5):598-602.
15. Ostelo RW, Deyo RA, Stratford P, et al: Interpreting change scores for pain and functional status in low back pain: Towards international consensus regarding minimal important change. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2008;33(1):90-94.
16. Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, ed 2. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988.
17. Nabhan A, Ahlhelm F, Pitzen T, et al: Disc replacement using Pro-Disc C versus fusion: A prospective randomised and controlled radiographic and clinical study. Eur Spine J 2007;16(3):423-430.
18. Freemantle N, Calvert M, Wood J, Eastaugh J, Griffin C: Composite outcomes in randomized trials: Greater precision but with greater uncertainty? JAMA 2003;289(19):2554-2559.
19. Lim E, Brown A, Helmy A, Mussa S, Altman DG: Composite outcomes in cardiovascular research: A survey of randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 2008;149(9):612-617.
20. Ferreira-González I, Busse JW, Heels-Ansdell D, et al: Problems with use of composite end points in cardiovascular trials: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2007;334(7597): 786.