Cargando…

Comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc degenerative diseases on the basis of more than 60 months of follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis was designed to investigate the long-term efficacy and safety between cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in treating cervical disc degenerative diseases (CDDDs). METHODS: Literature search was performed on Pubmed, Embase...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Yijian, Lv, Nanning, He, Fan, Pi, Bin, Liu, Hao, Chen, Angela Carley, Yang, Huilin, Liu, Mingming, Zhu, Xuesong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7171870/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32312321
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-020-01717-0
_version_ 1783524154829438976
author Zhang, Yijian
Lv, Nanning
He, Fan
Pi, Bin
Liu, Hao
Chen, Angela Carley
Yang, Huilin
Liu, Mingming
Zhu, Xuesong
author_facet Zhang, Yijian
Lv, Nanning
He, Fan
Pi, Bin
Liu, Hao
Chen, Angela Carley
Yang, Huilin
Liu, Mingming
Zhu, Xuesong
author_sort Zhang, Yijian
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis was designed to investigate the long-term efficacy and safety between cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in treating cervical disc degenerative diseases (CDDDs). METHODS: Literature search was performed on Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science before Jan 2019. Surgical details, clinical outcomes, range of motion (ROM), complications, and reoperation rates between CDA and ACDF groups were compared and analyzed. A fixed- or random-effects model was applied based on different heterogeneity. STATA (Version 11.0) software was used to perform data analysis. RESULTS: A total of 13 randomized controlled trial studies with more than 60 months of follow-up (mean 83.1 months) were enrolled in this meta-analysis. Pool results indicated that the CDA group exhibited significantly better outcomes in clinical scores (odds ratio [OR] = 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15–2.08, p = 0.004) and preservation of ROM (mean difference = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.60–1.95, p < 0.001) than the ACDF group. Meanwhile, the incidence of adjacent segment disease (ASD) (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.35–0.76, p = 0.001) and occurrence of reoperation (OR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.25–0.69, p = 0.001) were lower in the CDA group than in the ACDF group. CONCLUSIONS: At long-term follow-up, CDA showed better efficacy in terms of clinical outcomes, ROM, ASD, and reoperation than ACDF for treating CDDDs. However, our results require further validation in large-sample and high-quality studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7171870
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71718702020-04-24 Comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc degenerative diseases on the basis of more than 60 months of follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis Zhang, Yijian Lv, Nanning He, Fan Pi, Bin Liu, Hao Chen, Angela Carley Yang, Huilin Liu, Mingming Zhu, Xuesong BMC Neurol Research Article BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis was designed to investigate the long-term efficacy and safety between cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in treating cervical disc degenerative diseases (CDDDs). METHODS: Literature search was performed on Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science before Jan 2019. Surgical details, clinical outcomes, range of motion (ROM), complications, and reoperation rates between CDA and ACDF groups were compared and analyzed. A fixed- or random-effects model was applied based on different heterogeneity. STATA (Version 11.0) software was used to perform data analysis. RESULTS: A total of 13 randomized controlled trial studies with more than 60 months of follow-up (mean 83.1 months) were enrolled in this meta-analysis. Pool results indicated that the CDA group exhibited significantly better outcomes in clinical scores (odds ratio [OR] = 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15–2.08, p = 0.004) and preservation of ROM (mean difference = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.60–1.95, p < 0.001) than the ACDF group. Meanwhile, the incidence of adjacent segment disease (ASD) (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.35–0.76, p = 0.001) and occurrence of reoperation (OR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.25–0.69, p = 0.001) were lower in the CDA group than in the ACDF group. CONCLUSIONS: At long-term follow-up, CDA showed better efficacy in terms of clinical outcomes, ROM, ASD, and reoperation than ACDF for treating CDDDs. However, our results require further validation in large-sample and high-quality studies. BioMed Central 2020-04-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7171870/ /pubmed/32312321 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-020-01717-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zhang, Yijian
Lv, Nanning
He, Fan
Pi, Bin
Liu, Hao
Chen, Angela Carley
Yang, Huilin
Liu, Mingming
Zhu, Xuesong
Comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc degenerative diseases on the basis of more than 60 months of follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc degenerative diseases on the basis of more than 60 months of follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc degenerative diseases on the basis of more than 60 months of follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc degenerative diseases on the basis of more than 60 months of follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc degenerative diseases on the basis of more than 60 months of follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc degenerative diseases on the basis of more than 60 months of follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc degenerative diseases on the basis of more than 60 months of follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7171870/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32312321
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-020-01717-0
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangyijian comparisonofcervicaldiscarthroplastyandanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionforthetreatmentofcervicaldiscdegenerativediseasesonthebasisofmorethan60monthsoffollowupasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lvnanning comparisonofcervicaldiscarthroplastyandanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionforthetreatmentofcervicaldiscdegenerativediseasesonthebasisofmorethan60monthsoffollowupasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hefan comparisonofcervicaldiscarthroplastyandanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionforthetreatmentofcervicaldiscdegenerativediseasesonthebasisofmorethan60monthsoffollowupasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT pibin comparisonofcervicaldiscarthroplastyandanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionforthetreatmentofcervicaldiscdegenerativediseasesonthebasisofmorethan60monthsoffollowupasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT liuhao comparisonofcervicaldiscarthroplastyandanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionforthetreatmentofcervicaldiscdegenerativediseasesonthebasisofmorethan60monthsoffollowupasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chenangelacarley comparisonofcervicaldiscarthroplastyandanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionforthetreatmentofcervicaldiscdegenerativediseasesonthebasisofmorethan60monthsoffollowupasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT yanghuilin comparisonofcervicaldiscarthroplastyandanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionforthetreatmentofcervicaldiscdegenerativediseasesonthebasisofmorethan60monthsoffollowupasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT liumingming comparisonofcervicaldiscarthroplastyandanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionforthetreatmentofcervicaldiscdegenerativediseasesonthebasisofmorethan60monthsoffollowupasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhuxuesong comparisonofcervicaldiscarthroplastyandanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionforthetreatmentofcervicaldiscdegenerativediseasesonthebasisofmorethan60monthsoffollowupasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis