Arthroplasty versus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease: A cochrane review

Spine

Volumn 38, Issue 17, 2013, Pages

  Boselie, Toon F M ^a   Willems, Paul C ^a   Van Mameren, Henk ^b   De Bie, Rob A ^b   Benzel, Edward C ^c   Van Santbrink, Henk ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

arthroplasty; cervical; cervical degenerative disc disease; Cochrane collaboration; disc replacement; discectomy; fusion; meta analysis; myelopathy; radiculopathy; systematic review

Indexed keywords

ARM PAIN; ARTHROPLASTY; ARTICLE; CERVICAL SPINE; FOLLOW UP; FUNCTIONAL STATUS; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; NECK DISABILITY INDEX; NECK PAIN; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADICULOPATHY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SHOULDER PAIN; SPINAL CORD DISEASE; SPINE FUSION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 84882449077     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182994a32     Document Type: Article

References (98)

1. Gore DR, Sepic SB. Anterior cervical fusion for degenerated or protruded discs. A review of one hundred forty-six patients. Spine 1984;9:667-71.
2. Gore DR, Sepic SB. Anterior discectomy and fusion for painful cervical disc disease. A report of 50 patients with an average follow-up of 21 years. Spine 1998;23:2047-51.
3. Klein GR, Vaccaro AR, Albert TJ. Health outcome assessment before and after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for radiculopathy: a prospective analysis. Spine 2000;25:801-3.
4. White Aa rd, Southwick WO, Deponte RJ, et al. Relief of pain by anterior cervical-spine fusion for spondylosis. A report of sixty-fi ve patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1973;55:525-34.
5. Wieser ES, Wang JC. Surgery for neck pain. Neurosurgery 2007;60:S51-S6.
6. Henderson CM, Hennessy RG, Shuey HM, Jr, et al. Posteriorlateral foraminotomy as an exclusive operative technique for cervical radiculopathy: a review of 846 consecutively operated cases. Neurosurgery 1983;13:504-12.
7. Dowd GC, Wirth FP. Anterior cervical discectomy: is fusion necessary J Neurosurg 1999;90:8-12.
8. Wirth FP, Dowd GC, Sanders HF, et al. Cervical discectomy. A prospective analysis of three operative techniques. Surg Neurol 2000;53:340-6.
9. Nandoe Tewarie RD, Bartels RH, Peul WC. Long-term outcome after anterior cervical discectomy without fusion. Eur Spine J 2007;16:1411-6.
10. Fountas KN, Kapsalaki EZ, Nikolakakos LG, et al. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion associated complications. Spine 2007;32:2310-7.
11. Grob D. Surgery in the degenerative cervical spine. Spine 1998;23:2674-83.
12. Persson LC, Moritz U, Brandt L, et al. Cervical radiculopathy: pain, muscle weakness and sensory loss in patients with cervical radiculopathy treated with surgery, physiotherapy or cervical collar. A prospective, controlled study. Eur Spine J 1997;6:256-66.
13. Eck JC, Humphreys SC, Lim TH, et al. Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion. Spine 2002;27:2431-4.
14. Seo M, Choi D. Adjacent segment disease after fusion for cervical spondylosis; myth or reality Br J Neurosurg 2008;22:195-9.
15. Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA, et al. Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Vol 1999;81:519-28.
16. Bartels RH, Donk R, Verbeek AL. No justifi cation for cervical disk prostheses in clinical practice: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Neurosurg 2010;66:1153-60.
17. Botelho RV, Moraes OJ, Fernandes GA, et al. A systematic review of randomized trials on the effect of cervical disc arthroplasty on reducing adjacent-level degeneration. Neurosurg Focus 2010;28:E5.
18. Review Manager (RevMan) [computer program]. Version 5.1. Copenhagen:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
19. Furlan AD, Pennick V, Bombardier C, et al. 2009 updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group. Spine 2009;34:1929-41.
20. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available at: www.cochrane-handbook.org.
21. Arts MP, Brand R, van den Akker E, et al. The NEtherlands Cervical Kinematics (NECK) trial. Cost-effectiveness of anterior cervical discectomy with or without interbody fusion and arthroplasty in the treatment of cervical disc herniation; a double-blind randomised multicenter study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2010;11:122.
22. Coric D, Cassis J, Carew JD, et al. Prospective study of cervical arthroplasty in 98 patients involved in 1 of 3 separate investigational device exemption studies from a single investigational site with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2010;13:715-21.
23. Coric D, Nunley PD, Guyer RD, et al. Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kinefl ex-C artifi cial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 2011;15:348-58.
24. Guyer RD, Coric D, Nunley P, et al. Prospective, randomized, multicenter trial comparing cervical total disc replacement to anterior cervical fusion in 269 patients: 24-month follow-up. Spine J 2010;10:41S-2S.
25. Guyer RD, Blumenthal SL, Zigler JE, et al. A prospective randomized comparison of cervical disc replacement and anterior cervical fusion: combined results from fi ve FDA IDE trials from a single site. Spine J 2010;10:S43.
26. Musante DB, Coric D, Guyer RD, et al. Comparison of radiographic fi ndings of total disc replacement vs. anterior cervical fusion: 24-month follow-up from a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial with 269 patients. Spine J 2010;10:32S-3S.
27. Jawahar A, Cavanaugh DA, Kerr EJ, et al. Total disc arthroplasty does not affect the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical spine: results of 93 patients in three prospective, randomized, clinical trials. Spine J 2010;10:34S.
28. Jawahar A, Cavanaugh DA, Kerr Iii EJ, et al. Total disc arthroplasty does not affect the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical spine: results of 93 patients in three prospective randomized clinical trials. Spine J 2010;10:1043-8.
29. Coric D, Finger F, Boltes P. Prospective randomized controlled study of the Bryan cervical disc: early clinical results from a single investigational site. Spine 2006;4:31-5.
30. Garrido BJ, Wilhite J, Nakano M, et al. Adjacent-level cervical ossifi cation after Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93:1185-9.
31. Garrido BJ, Taha TA, Sasso RC. Clinical outcomes of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty a prospective, randomized, controlled, single site trial with 48-month follow-up. J Spin Disord Tech 2010;23:367-71.
32. Hacker RJ. Cervical disc arthroplasty: a controlled randomized prospective study with intermediate follow-up results. Invited submission from the joint section meeting on disorders of the spine and peripheral nerves, March 2005. Spine 2005;3:424-8.
33. Heller J, Sasso R, Anderson P, et al. Bryan cervical disc replacement: results of the United States Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine J 2007;7:3.
34. 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 2009;34:101-7.
35. Powell JW, Sasso RC, Metcalf NH, et al. Quality of spinal motion with cervical disk arthroplasty: computer-aided radiographic analysis. J Spinal Disord Tech 2010;23:89-95.
36. Riew KD, Buchowski JM, Sasso R, et al. Cervical disc arthroplasty compared with arthrodesis for the treatment of myelopathy. J Bone Joint Surg-Series A 2008;90:2354-64.
37. Riina J, Anderson PA, Holly LT, et al. The effect of an anterior cervical operation for cervical radiculopathy or myelopathy on associated headaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009;91:1919-23.
38. Sasso RC, Anderson PA, Riew KD, et al. Results of cervical arthroplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: four-year clinical outcomes in a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Orthopedics 2011;34:889.
39. Sasso RC, Anderson PA, Riew KD, et al. Results of cervical arthroplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: four-year clinical outcomes in a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93:1684-92.
40. Sasso RC, Metcalf NH, Hipp JA, et al. Sagittal alignment after Bryan cervical arthroplasty. Spine 2011;36:991-6.
41. Sasso RC, Best NM. Cervical kinematics after fusion and Bryan disc arthroplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech 2008;21:19-22.
42. Sasso RC, Best NM, Metcalf NH, et al. Motion analysis of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior discectomy and fusion: results from a prospective, randomized, multicenter, clinical trial. J Spinal Disord Tech 2008;21:393-9.
43. Sasso RC, Heller JG, Anderson PA, et al. Cervical disc replacement: four-year follow-up results from the United States prospective randomized Bryan clinical trial. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cervical Spine Research Society, CSRS. 2009;Salt Lake City, UT.
44. Sasso RC, Smucker JD, Hacker RJ, et al. Clinical outcomes of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial with 24-month follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 2007;20:481-91.
45. Sasso RC, Smucker JD, Hacker RJ, et al. Artifi cial disc versus fusion: a prospective, randomized study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients. Spine 2007;32:2933-40.
46. Steinmetz MP, Patel R, Traynelis V, et al. Cervical disc arthroplasty compared with fusion in a workers' compensation population. Neurosurgery 2008;63:741-7.
47. Delamarter RB, Murrey D, Janssen ME, et al. Results at 24 months from the prospective, randomized, multicenter Investigational Device Exemption trial of ProDisc-C versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with 4-year follow-up and continued access patients. SAS J 2010;4:122-8.
48. Kearns S, Janssen M, Murrey D, et al. Five-year results of the prodisc-C multicenter randomized clinical trial. Spine J 2011;11:46S.
49. Kelly MP, Mok JM, Frisch RF, et al. Adjacent segment motion after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus Prodisc-c cervical total disk arthroplasty: analysis from a randomized, controlled trial. Spine 2011;36:1171-9.
50. Kelly MP, Mok JM, Frisch RF, et al. Comparison of adjacent segment motion following ACDF vs ProDisc-C arthroplasty: analysis from a randomized, controlled trial with 2 years follow-up. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cervical Spine Research Society, CSRS. 2009;Salt Lake City, UT.
51. 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;9:275-86.
52. Murrey D, Janssen ME, Delamarter RB, et al. 5-Year results of the prospective, randomized, multi-center FDA Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) ProDisc-C TDR clinical trial. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cervical Spine Research Society, CSRS. 2009;Salt Lake City, UT.
53. Murrey DB, Janssen ME, Odum SM, et al. Two-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing ProDisc-c and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. SAS J 2008;2:76-85.
54. Park JJ, Quirno M, Cunningham MR, et al. Analysis of segmental cervical spine vertebral motion after ProDisc-C cervical disc replacement. Spine 2010;35:E285-E9.
55. Segebarth B, Datta JC, Darden B, et al. Incidence of dysphagia comparing cervical arthroplasty and ACDF. SAS J 2010;4:3-8.
56. Marzluff J, McConnell J, Tomaras C, et al. 2-Year multicenter follow-up in a prospective randomized clinical trial: comparison of a cervical artifi cial disc to an ACDF treatment. Spine J 2010;10:135S-6S.
57. Howell K, Phillips F, Cappuccino A, et al. A prospective, randomized clinical investigation of the porous coated motion (PCM) artifi cial cervical disc: Two-year results from the US IDE study. Paper presented at: Conference: 26th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Society, NASS 2011;Chicago, IL, United States;2011:18S.
58. McAfee PC, Cappuccino A, Cunningham BW, et al. Lower incidence of dysphagia with cervical arthroplasty compared with ACDF in a prospective randomized clinical trial. J Spinal Disord Tech 2010;23:1-8.
59. Park DK, Lin EL, Phillips FM. Index and adjacent level kinematics after cervical disc replacement and anterior fusion: in vivo quantitative radiographic analysis. Spine 2011;36:721-30.
60. Burkus JK, Haid RW, Traynelis VC, et al. Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc replacement with the Prestige disc: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 2010;13:308-18.
61. Haid RW, Burkus JK, Traynelis VC, et al. Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of the PRESTIGE ST cervical disc replacement: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cervical Spine Research Society, CSRS 2009;Salt Lake City, UT.
62. Mummaneni PV, Burkus JK, Haid RW, et al. Clinical and radiographic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 2007;6:198-209.
63. Riina J, Patel A, Dietz JW, et al. Comparison of single-level cervical fusion and a metal-on-metal cervical disc replacement device. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead, N.J.) 2008;37:E71-E7.
64. Ahlhelm F, Lieb J, Ulmer S, et al. Segmentale Beweglichkeit nach anteriorer zervikaler Dekompression-Eine Vergleichsstudie. [German]. Schweizer Archiv fur Neurologie und Psychiatrie 2010;161:52S.
65. 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;16:423-30.
66. Nabhan A, Ahlhelm F, Shariat K, et al. The ProDisc-C prosthesis: clinical and radiological experience 1 year after surgery. Spine 2007;32:1935-41.
67. Nabhan A, Ishak B, Steudel WI, et al. Assessment of adjacent-segment mobility after cervical disc replacement versus fusion: RCT with 1 year's results. Eur Spine J 2011;20:934-41.
68. Nabhan A, Pape D, Pitzen T, et al. Cervical spine disc replacement versus fusion: a prospective randomized and controlled radiographic and clinical study. Eur Spine J 2006;15:S473.
69. Nabhan A, Steudel WI, Nabhan A, et al. Segmental kinematics and adjacent level degeneration following disc replacement versus fusion: RCT with three years of follow-up. J Long-Term Eff Med Implants 2007;17:229-36.
70. Pettine KA. Clinical and radiographic outcome of the neo disc cervical total disc replacement (TDR) at 2-year follow-up. Spine J 2010;10:S44-S.
71. Brotchi J, Gill S, Kahler R, et al. A multicenter, prospective, randomized, study of an artifi cial cervical disc versus fusion for primary cervical disc surgery. J Bone Joint Surg (Proceedings) 2004;86-B:85-6.
72. McCombe P, Brotchi J, Gill S, et al. A multicenter, prospective, randomized, study of the prestige artifi cial cervical disc versus fusion for primary cervical disc surgery. J Bone Joint Surg (Proceedings) 2005;87-B:411.
73. Porchet F, Metcalf NH. Clinical outcomes with the Prestige II cervical disc: preliminary results from a prospective randomized clinical trial. Neurosurg Focus 2004;17:E6.
74. Porchet F, Nelson R, Gill S, et al. A multicenter, prospective, randomized study of an artifi cial cervical disc versus fusion for primary cervical disc surgery. Eur Spine J 2002;11:S38-S.
75. Bhadra AK, Raman AS, Casey AT, et al. Single-level cervical radiculopathy: clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of four techniques of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion and disc arthroplasty. Eur Spine J 2009;18:232-7.
76. Bryan VE. Cervical motion segment replacement. Eur Spine J 2002;11:S92-S7.
77. Cao J, Shen Y, Yang D, et al. Contrastive analysis of neck axial symptoms after Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty or traditional anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery 2008;22:1200-4.
78. Kim SW, Limson MA, Kim SB, et al. Comparison of radiographic changes after ACDF versus Bryan disc arthroplasty in single and bi-level cases. Eur Spine J 2009;18:218-31.
79. Ogon M, Meissner J, Tuschel A, et al. Cervical disk arthroplasty. J Fur Mineralstoffwechsel 2006;13:14-7.
80. Park JH, Roh KH, Cho JY, et al. Comparative analysis of cervical arthroplasty using Mobi-c(r) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using the Solis(r)-cage. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2008;44:217-21.
81. Wang Y, Cai B, Zhang XS, et al. Clinical outcomes of single level Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective controlled study. Zhonghua wai ke za zhi 2008;46:328-32.
82. Peng-Fei S, Yu-Hua J. Cervical disc prosthesis replacement and interbody fusion: a comparative study. Int Orthop 2008;32:103-6.
83. Abitbol JJ, Maroon JC, Edwards WS, et al. 2-year results from four IDE study sites: CerviCore intervertebral disc vs. fusion. Spine J 2010;10:139S-40S.
84. Abitbol JJ, Youssef JA, Wright NM, et al. CerviCore disc replacement versus fusion for single-level cervical radiculopathy: one-year outcomes from 4 study sites in a prospective randomized controlled trial. Can J Surg 2009;52:S7.
85. Attabib N, duPlessis S, Casha S, et al. Cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: prospective randomized trial. Can J Surg 2008;51:S7-S8.
86. Bae HW, Lotuaco R, Kanim LEA, et al. Mobi-C cervical disc replacement for the treatment of one and two-level cervical degenerative disc disease: one-site analysis participating in the US FDA trial. Spine J 2010;10:145S.
87. Davis R, Bae H W, Gaede S, et al. A prospective, randomised, controlled, multi-centre clinical study (IDE) comparing the Mobi-C cervical disc prosthesis with anterior discectomy and fusion in the treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease at 2 levels. Eur Spine J 2011;20:1209.
88. Davis R. Comparison of the Mobi C cervical artifi cial disc to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the treatment of symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease at two levels. Spine J 2011;11:135S.
89. Nunley P, Jawahar A, Bae H, et al. A prospective randomized controlled trial to assess the effi cacy of the Mobi-C artifi cial cervical disc in the management of intractable cervical myelo-radiculopathy at one or two contiguous level. Spine J 2011;11:47S-8S.
90. Bartels RH, Donk R, van der Wilt GJ, et al. Design of the PROCON trial: a prospective, randomized multi-center study comparing cervical anterior discectomy without fusion, with fusion or with arthroplasty. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2006;7:85.
91. Buchowski JM, Anderson PA, Sekhon L, et al. Cervical disc arthroplasty compared with arthrodesis for the treatment of myelopathy. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009;91:223-32.
92. Robertson JT, Papadopoulos SM, Traynelis VC. Assessment of adjacent-segment disease in patients treated with cervical fusion or arthroplasty: a prospective 2-year study. Spine J 2005;3: 417-23.
93. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines: Rating the quality of evidence-study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:407-15.
94. Cepoiu-Martin M, Faris P, Lorenzetti D, et al. Artifi cial cervical disc arthroplasty: a systematic review. Spine 2011;36:E1623-E33.
95. Jiang H, Zhu Z, Qiu Y, et al. Cervical disc arthroplasty versus fusion for single-level symptomatic cervical disc disease: a metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2012;132:141-51.
96. McAfee PC, Reah C, Gilder K, et al. A meta-analysis of comparative outcomes following cervical arthroplasty or anterior cervical fusion: results from four prospective multi-center randomized clinical trials and up to 1226 patients. Spine 2012;37:943-52.
97. Upadhyaya CD, Wu JC, Trost G, et al. Analysis of the three United States Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption cervical arthroplasty trials. J Neurosurg Spine 2012;16:216-28.
98. Yu L, Song Y, Yang X, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: comparison of total disk replacement with anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Orthopedics 2011;34:e651-e8.