Cargando…
Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With a Stand-Alone Interbody Cage Versus a Conventional Cage-Plate Technique: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: Compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with a stand-alone interbody cage versus a conventional cage and anterior cervical plate technique. METHODS: A systematic Medline search was...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6562216/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31218204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218774576 |
_version_ | 1783426253248790528 |
---|---|
author | Cheung, Zoe B. Gidumal, Sunder White, Samuel Shin, John Phan, Kevin Osman, Nebiyu Bronheim, Rachel Vargas, Luilly Kim, Jun S. Cho, Samuel K. |
author_facet | Cheung, Zoe B. Gidumal, Sunder White, Samuel Shin, John Phan, Kevin Osman, Nebiyu Bronheim, Rachel Vargas, Luilly Kim, Jun S. Cho, Samuel K. |
author_sort | Cheung, Zoe B. |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: Compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with a stand-alone interbody cage versus a conventional cage and anterior cervical plate technique. METHODS: A systematic Medline search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews. Search terms included “anterior cervical discectomy and fusion,” “cage,” and “bone plates,” or variations thereof. Only studies involving a direct comparison of ACDF with a stand-alone cage versus a cage and plate were included. From the selected studies, we extracted data on patient demographics, comorbidities, surgical risk factors, and pre- and postoperative radiographic findings. A meta-analysis was performed on all outcome measures. The quality of each study was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS: Nineteen studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients who underwent ACDF with a cage-only technique had significantly lower rates of postoperative dysphagia and adjacent segment disease compared with patients who underwent ACDF with a cage-plate technique. However, patients who underwent ACDF with a cage-plate technique had better radiographic outcomes with significantly less subsidence and better restoration of cervical lordosis. There were no other significant differences in outcomes or postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: ACDF with a cage-only technique appears to have better clinical outcomes than the cage-plate technique, despite radiographic findings of increased rates of subsidence and less restoration of cervical lordosis. Future randomized controlled trials with longer term follow-up are needed to confirm the findings of this meta-analysis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6562216 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65622162019-06-19 Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With a Stand-Alone Interbody Cage Versus a Conventional Cage-Plate Technique: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Cheung, Zoe B. Gidumal, Sunder White, Samuel Shin, John Phan, Kevin Osman, Nebiyu Bronheim, Rachel Vargas, Luilly Kim, Jun S. Cho, Samuel K. Global Spine J Review Articles STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: Compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with a stand-alone interbody cage versus a conventional cage and anterior cervical plate technique. METHODS: A systematic Medline search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews. Search terms included “anterior cervical discectomy and fusion,” “cage,” and “bone plates,” or variations thereof. Only studies involving a direct comparison of ACDF with a stand-alone cage versus a cage and plate were included. From the selected studies, we extracted data on patient demographics, comorbidities, surgical risk factors, and pre- and postoperative radiographic findings. A meta-analysis was performed on all outcome measures. The quality of each study was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS: Nineteen studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients who underwent ACDF with a cage-only technique had significantly lower rates of postoperative dysphagia and adjacent segment disease compared with patients who underwent ACDF with a cage-plate technique. However, patients who underwent ACDF with a cage-plate technique had better radiographic outcomes with significantly less subsidence and better restoration of cervical lordosis. There were no other significant differences in outcomes or postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: ACDF with a cage-only technique appears to have better clinical outcomes than the cage-plate technique, despite radiographic findings of increased rates of subsidence and less restoration of cervical lordosis. Future randomized controlled trials with longer term follow-up are needed to confirm the findings of this meta-analysis. SAGE Publications 2018-05-17 2019-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6562216/ /pubmed/31218204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218774576 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Review Articles Cheung, Zoe B. Gidumal, Sunder White, Samuel Shin, John Phan, Kevin Osman, Nebiyu Bronheim, Rachel Vargas, Luilly Kim, Jun S. Cho, Samuel K. Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With a Stand-Alone Interbody Cage Versus a Conventional Cage-Plate Technique: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title | Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With a Stand-Alone
Interbody Cage Versus a Conventional Cage-Plate Technique: A Systematic Review and
Meta-Analysis |
title_full | Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With a Stand-Alone
Interbody Cage Versus a Conventional Cage-Plate Technique: A Systematic Review and
Meta-Analysis |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With a Stand-Alone
Interbody Cage Versus a Conventional Cage-Plate Technique: A Systematic Review and
Meta-Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With a Stand-Alone
Interbody Cage Versus a Conventional Cage-Plate Technique: A Systematic Review and
Meta-Analysis |
title_short | Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With a Stand-Alone
Interbody Cage Versus a Conventional Cage-Plate Technique: A Systematic Review and
Meta-Analysis |
title_sort | comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with a stand-alone
interbody cage versus a conventional cage-plate technique: a systematic review and
meta-analysis |
topic | Review Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6562216/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31218204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218774576 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cheungzoeb comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithastandaloneinterbodycageversusaconventionalcageplatetechniqueasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT gidumalsunder comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithastandaloneinterbodycageversusaconventionalcageplatetechniqueasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT whitesamuel comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithastandaloneinterbodycageversusaconventionalcageplatetechniqueasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT shinjohn comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithastandaloneinterbodycageversusaconventionalcageplatetechniqueasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT phankevin comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithastandaloneinterbodycageversusaconventionalcageplatetechniqueasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT osmannebiyu comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithastandaloneinterbodycageversusaconventionalcageplatetechniqueasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT bronheimrachel comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithastandaloneinterbodycageversusaconventionalcageplatetechniqueasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT vargasluilly comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithastandaloneinterbodycageversusaconventionalcageplatetechniqueasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT kimjuns comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithastandaloneinterbodycageversusaconventionalcageplatetechniqueasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT chosamuelk comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithastandaloneinterbodycageversusaconventionalcageplatetechniqueasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |