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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cheung, Zoe B., Gidumal, Sunder, White, Samuel, Shin, John, Phan, Kevin, Osman, Nebiyu, Bronheim, Rachel, Vargas, Luilly, Kim, Jun S., Cho, Samuel K.
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