Cargando…

Comparison of the more than 5-year clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) was almost the “golden standard” technique in treatment of symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease, however, it cause motion loss of the indexed level, increase the intradiscal pressure and motion of the adjacent levels, and may accel...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shao, Min-Min, Chen, Chun-Hui, Lin, Zhong-Ke, Wang, Xiang-Yang, Huang, Qi-Shan, Chi, Yong-Long, Wu, Ai-Min
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5181829/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28002345
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000005733
_version_ 1782485776452288512
author Shao, Min-Min
Chen, Chun-Hui
Lin, Zhong-Ke
Wang, Xiang-Yang
Huang, Qi-Shan
Chi, Yong-Long
Wu, Ai-Min
author_facet Shao, Min-Min
Chen, Chun-Hui
Lin, Zhong-Ke
Wang, Xiang-Yang
Huang, Qi-Shan
Chi, Yong-Long
Wu, Ai-Min
author_sort Shao, Min-Min
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) was almost the “golden standard” technique in treatment of symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease, however, it cause motion loss of the indexed level, increase the intradiscal pressure and motion of the adjacent levels, and may accelerate the degeneration of adjacent level. Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) was designed to preserve the motion of index level, avoid the over-activity of adjacent levels and reduce the degeneration of adjacent disc levels, the process of degeneration of adjacent level is very slowly, long term follow up studies should be conducted, this study aim to compare the more than 5 years’ long-term clinical outcomes and safety between CDA and ACDF. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis that will be performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). The electric database of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library will be systematic search. A standard data form will be used to extract the data of included studies. We will assess the studies according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and perform analysis in software STATA 12.0. Fixed-effects models will be used for homogeneity data, while random-effects will be used for heterogeneity data. The overall effect sizes will be determined as weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous outcomes and Relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: The results of study will be disseminated via both international conference and peer-review journal. CONCLUSION: The conclusion of our study will provide the long-term and updated evidence of clinical outcomes and safety between CDA and ACDF, and help surgeon to change better surgical technique for patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5181829
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51818292016-12-28 Comparison of the more than 5-year clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials Shao, Min-Min Chen, Chun-Hui Lin, Zhong-Ke Wang, Xiang-Yang Huang, Qi-Shan Chi, Yong-Long Wu, Ai-Min Medicine (Baltimore) 3700 BACKGROUND: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) was almost the “golden standard” technique in treatment of symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease, however, it cause motion loss of the indexed level, increase the intradiscal pressure and motion of the adjacent levels, and may accelerate the degeneration of adjacent level. Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) was designed to preserve the motion of index level, avoid the over-activity of adjacent levels and reduce the degeneration of adjacent disc levels, the process of degeneration of adjacent level is very slowly, long term follow up studies should be conducted, this study aim to compare the more than 5 years’ long-term clinical outcomes and safety between CDA and ACDF. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis that will be performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). The electric database of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library will be systematic search. A standard data form will be used to extract the data of included studies. We will assess the studies according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and perform analysis in software STATA 12.0. Fixed-effects models will be used for homogeneity data, while random-effects will be used for heterogeneity data. The overall effect sizes will be determined as weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous outcomes and Relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: The results of study will be disseminated via both international conference and peer-review journal. CONCLUSION: The conclusion of our study will provide the long-term and updated evidence of clinical outcomes and safety between CDA and ACDF, and help surgeon to change better surgical technique for patients. Wolters Kluwer Health 2016-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC5181829/ /pubmed/28002345 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000005733 Text en Copyright © 2016 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
spellingShingle 3700
Shao, Min-Min
Chen, Chun-Hui
Lin, Zhong-Ke
Wang, Xiang-Yang
Huang, Qi-Shan
Chi, Yong-Long
Wu, Ai-Min
Comparison of the more than 5-year clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials
title Comparison of the more than 5-year clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials
title_full Comparison of the more than 5-year clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Comparison of the more than 5-year clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the more than 5-year clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials
title_short Comparison of the more than 5-year clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials
title_sort comparison of the more than 5-year clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials
topic 3700
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5181829/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28002345
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000005733
work_keys_str_mv AT shaominmin comparisonofthemorethan5yearclinicaloutcomesofcervicaldiscarthroplastyversusanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionaprotocolforasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT chenchunhui comparisonofthemorethan5yearclinicaloutcomesofcervicaldiscarthroplastyversusanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionaprotocolforasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT linzhongke comparisonofthemorethan5yearclinicaloutcomesofcervicaldiscarthroplastyversusanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionaprotocolforasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT wangxiangyang comparisonofthemorethan5yearclinicaloutcomesofcervicaldiscarthroplastyversusanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionaprotocolforasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT huangqishan comparisonofthemorethan5yearclinicaloutcomesofcervicaldiscarthroplastyversusanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionaprotocolforasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT chiyonglong comparisonofthemorethan5yearclinicaloutcomesofcervicaldiscarthroplastyversusanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionaprotocolforasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT wuaimin comparisonofthemorethan5yearclinicaloutcomesofcervicaldiscarthroplastyversusanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionaprotocolforasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrials