Cargando…
Total disc replacement in the cervical spine: a systematic review evaluating long-term safety
Study design: Systematic review. Clinical questions: What are the rates and causes of subsequent surgeries? What is the long-term complication rates following cervical artificial disc replacement (C-ADR)? How do these rates change over time? Methods: A systematic review was undertaken for articles p...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
© AOSpine International
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3519400/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23236309 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1298604 |
Sumario: | Study design: Systematic review. Clinical questions: What are the rates and causes of subsequent surgeries? What is the long-term complication rates following cervical artificial disc replacement (C-ADR)? How do these rates change over time? Methods: A systematic review was undertaken for articles published up to October 2011. Electronic databases and reference lists of key articles were searched to identify comparative and non-comparative studies reporting long-term (≥ 48 months) complications of C-ADR. Two independent reviewers assessed the strength of evidence using the GRADE criteria and disagreements were resolved by consensus. Results: Two RCTs reporting outcomes following C-ADR (Bryan disc, Prestige disc) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) at follow-ups of 4 to 5 years were found; five case series reporting outcomes following C-ADR at follow-ups of 4 to 8 years were identified. Secondary surgery rates were similar or slightly lower following C-ADR compared with fusion at 4 to 5 years postoperatively. In one small subset of an RCT, rates of adjacent disc heterotopic ossification were lower in C-ADR patients than in those treated with fusion. Rates of other adverse events were similar between treatment groups. Conclusions: There is low evidence on the long-term safety outcomes following C-ADR. Additional comparative studies with follow-up of at least 4 years are needed to fully understand the long-term safety outcomes of C-ADR compared with fusion. |
---|