Home > DARE Reviews > Cervical artificial disc replacement...

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet]. York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 1995-.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet].

Cervical artificial disc replacement versus fusion in the cervical spine: a systematic review comparing multilevel versus single-level surgery

Review published: 2012.

Bibliographic details: Kepler CK, Brodt ED, Dettori JR, Albert TJ.  Cervical artificial disc replacement versus fusion in the cervical spine: a systematic review comparing multilevel versus single-level surgery. Evidence-Based Spine-Care Journal 2012; 3(Supplement 1): 19-30. [PMC free article: PMC3519403] [PubMed: 23236310]

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN:  Systematic review.Clinical questions: What is the effectiveness of multilevel cervical artificial disc replacement (C-ADR) compared with multilevel fusion with respect to pain and functional outcomes, and are the two procedures comparable in terms of safety? What is the effectiveness of multilevel C-ADR compared with single-level C-ADR with respect to pain and functional outcomes, and are the two procedures comparable in terms of safety?

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 studies comparing multilevel C-ADR with multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or comparing multilevel C-ADR with single-level C-ADR. Studies which compared these procedures in the lumbar or thoracic spine or that reported alignment outcomes only were excluded. Two independent reviewers assessed the strength of evidence using the GRADE criteria and disagreements were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS:  Two studies compared multilevel C-ADR with multilevel ACDF. While both reported improved Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Short-Form 36 (SF-36) scores after C-ADR compared with ACDF, only one study reported statistically significant results. Seven studies compared single-level C-ADR with multilevel C-ADR. RESULTS were similar in terms of overall success, NDI and SF-36 scores, and patient satisfaction. There is discrepant information regarding rates of heterotopic ossification; dysphagia rate may be higher in multilevel C-ADR.

CONCLUSIONS:  The literature suggests that outcomes are at least similar for multilevel C-ADR and ACDF and may favor C-ADR. Future studies are necessary before firm recommendations can be made favoring one treatment strategy. Multilevel C-ADR seems to have similar results to single-level C-ADR but may have higher rates of heterotopic ossification and dysphagia.

CRD has determined that this article meets the DARE scientific quality criteria for a systematic review.

Copyright © 2014 University of York.

PMID: 23236310

PubMed Health Blog...

read all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...