Rate of adjacent segment disease in cervical disc arthroplasty versus single-level fusion: Meta-analysis of prospective studies

Spine

Volumn 38, Issue 26, 2013, Pages 2253-2257

  Verma, Kushagra ^a   Gandhi, Sapan D ^b   Maltenfort, Mitchell ^a   Albert, Todd J ^a   Hilibrand, Alan S ^a   Vaccaro, Alexander R ^a   Radcliff, Kristin E ^a  

^a THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b DREXEL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

ACDF; adjacent segment disease; anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; ASD; CDR; cervical disc replacement; cervical fusion; motion sparing techniques; TDR; total disc arthroplasty; total disc replacement

Indexed keywords

ADJACENT SEGMENT DISEASE; ANTERIOR CERVICAL DECOMPRESSION AND FUSION; ANTERIOR SPINE FUSION; ARTHROPLASTY; ARTICLE; CERVICAL SPINE INJURY; COCHRANE LIBRARY; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; MOTION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REOPERATION; SAMPLE SIZE; SPINAL CORD DECOMPRESSION; SPINE MOBILITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TOTAL DISC ARTHROPLASTY; TOTAL DISC REPLACEMENT;

CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISC DEGENERATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; SPINAL FUSION; TOTAL DISC REPLACEMENT;

EID: 84891561085     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000052     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. 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 Am 1999; 81: 519-28.
2. Lund T, Oxland TR. Adjacent level disk disease-is it really a fusion disease? Orthop Clin North Am 2011; 42: 529-41, viii.
3. Hilibrand AS, Robbins M. Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion? Spine J 2004; 4 (6 suppl): 190S-4S.
4. DiAngelo DJ, Roberston JT, Metcalf NH, et al. Biomechanical testing of an artificial cervical joint and an anterior cervical plate. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003; 16: 314-23.
5. Wigfield C, Gill S, Nelson R, et al. Influence of an artificial cervical joint compared with fusion on adjacent-level motion in the treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. J Neurosurg 2002; 96 (1 suppl): 17-21.
6. Wright R W, Brand RA, Dunn W, et al. How to write a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007; 455: 23-9.
7. Gandhi SD, Verma K, Albert T, et al. How often is adjacent segment disease reported? A systematic review of prospective studies comparing total disc arthoplasty versus ACDF. Semin Spine Surg. 2013; 35: 205-208.
8. Bragge P. Asking good clinical research questions and choosing the right study design. Injury 2010; 41 (suppl 1): S3-6.
9. Cunningham BW, Hu N, Zorn CM, et al. Biomechanical comparison of single-and two-level cervical arthroplasty versus arthrod-esis: effect on adjacent-level spinal kinematics. Spine J 2010; 10: 341-49.
10. Auerbach JD, Anakwenze OA, Milby AH, et al. Segmental contribution toward total cervical range of motion: a comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011; 36: E1593-9.
11. Coric D, Nunley PD, Guyer RD, et al. Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kineflex|C artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2011; 15: 348-8.
12. Robertson JT, Papadopoulos SM, Traynelis VC. Assessment of adjacent-segment disease in patients treated with cervical fusion or arthroplasty: a prospective 2-year study. J Neurosurg Spine 2005; 3: 417-23.
13. Burkus JK, Haid R W, 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.
14. 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.
15. Sasso RC, Anderson PA, Riew KD, et al. Results of cervical arthro-plasty 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.
16. Jawahar A, Cavanaugh DA, Kerr EJ 3rd, et al. Total disc arthro-plasty 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.
17. Nunley PD, Jawahar A, Kerr EJ, 3rd, et al. Factors affecting the incidence of symptomatic adjacent-level disease in cervical spine after total disc arthroplasty: 2-to 4-year follow-up of 3 prospective randomized trials. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37:445-451.
18. Jiang H, Zhu Z, Qiu Y, et al. Cervical disc arthroplasty versus fusion for single-level symptomatic cervical disc disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2012;132:141-151.
19. Mummaneni P V, Burkus JK, Haid RW, et al. Clinical and radio-graphic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;6:198-209.
20. Gao Y, Liu M, Li T, et al. 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. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013; 95: 555-61.
21. Phillips FM, Lee JY, Geisler FH, et al. A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical investigation comparing PCM(r) cervical disc arthroplasty to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: 2 year results from the us IDE clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013.
22. Boselie TF, Willems PC, van Mameren H, et al. Arthroplasty versus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 9: CD009173.
23. Yang B, Li H, Zhang T, et al. The incidence of adjacent segment degeneration after cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA): a meta analysis of randomized controlled trials. PloS One 2012; 7: e35032.
24. Botelho R V, 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.
25. 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;17:229-236.
26. 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.