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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Anderson, Paul A., Hashimoto, Robin
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
_version_ 1782252662363783168
author Anderson, Paul A.
Hashimoto, Robin
author_facet Anderson, Paul A.
Hashimoto, Robin
author_sort Anderson, Paul A.
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3519400
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher © AOSpine International
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35194002012-12-12 Total disc replacement in the cervical spine: a systematic review evaluating long-term safety Anderson, Paul A. Hashimoto, Robin Evid Based Spine Care J Article 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. © AOSpine International 2012-02 /pmc/articles/PMC3519400/ /pubmed/23236309 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1298604 Text en © Thieme Medical Publishers
spellingShingle Article
Anderson, Paul A.
Hashimoto, Robin
Total disc replacement in the cervical spine: a systematic review evaluating long-term safety
title Total disc replacement in the cervical spine: a systematic review evaluating long-term safety
title_full Total disc replacement in the cervical spine: a systematic review evaluating long-term safety
title_fullStr Total disc replacement in the cervical spine: a systematic review evaluating long-term safety
title_full_unstemmed Total disc replacement in the cervical spine: a systematic review evaluating long-term safety
title_short Total disc replacement in the cervical spine: a systematic review evaluating long-term safety
title_sort total disc replacement in the cervical spine: a systematic review evaluating long-term safety
topic Article
url 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
work_keys_str_mv AT andersonpaula totaldiscreplacementinthecervicalspineasystematicreviewevaluatinglongtermsafety
AT hashimotorobin totaldiscreplacementinthecervicalspineasystematicreviewevaluatinglongtermsafety