What's the best surgical treatment for patients with cervical radiculopathy due to single-level degenerative disease? A randomized controlled trial.
ABSTRACT: To investigate the efficacy of adding supplemental fusion or arthroplasty after cervical anterior discectomy for symptomatic mono-level cervical degenerative disease (radiculopathy), which has not been substantiated in controlled trials until now.A randomized controlled trial is reported with 9 years follow up comparing anterior cervical anterior discectomy without fusion, with fusion by cage standalone, or with disc prosthesis. Patients suffering from symptomatic cervical disk degeneration at one level referred to spinal sections of department of neurosurgery or orthopedic surgery of a large general hospital with educational facilities were eligible. Neck Disability Index (NDI), McGill Pain Questionnaire Dutch language version (MPQ-DLV), physical-component summary (PCS), and mental-component summary (MCS) of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), and re operation rate were evaluated.142 patients between 18 and 55 years were allocated. The median follow-up was 8.9±1.9 years (5.6 to 12.2 years). The response rate at last follow-up was 98.5%. NDI at the last follow-up did not differ between the three treatment groups, nor did the secondary outcomes as MPQ-DLV and PCS or MCS from SF-36. The major improvement occurred within the first 6 weeks after surgery. Afterward, it remained stable. Eleven patients underwent surgery for recurrent symptoms and signs due to nerve root compression at the index or adjacent level.This randomized trial could not detect a difference between three surgical modalities for treating a single-level degenerative disk disease. Anterior cervical discectomy without implant seems to be similar to anterior cervical discectomy with fusion by cage stand-alone or with disk prosthesis. Due to the small study sample size, this statement should be considered as inconclusive so far.ISRCTN41681847.
Project description:PURPOSE:To compare sagittal alignment and clinical outcomes between three-level hybrid surgery (HS) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) on cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) over a 5-year follow-up. METHOD:The study included 32 patients with ACDF, 36 patients with 1 prosthesis and 2 cages (HS1 group), and 25 cases with 2 prostheses and 1 cage (HS2 group). Alignment parameters included C2-C7 cervical lordosis (CL), C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), T1 slope (T1S), and T1S minus CL (T1SCL). Radiographic parameters were range of motion (ROM), upper and lower adjacent ROM (UROM and LROM), and operated-segment lordosis (OPCL), as well as adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). Clinical outcomes included the neck disability index (NDI) and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score. RESULTS:Three groups were well-matched in demographics. All groups gained comparable improvement on NDI and JOA (P?<?0.01). All groups gained CL improvement at the final visit (P?<?0.05). There were no statistical differences on SVA and T1SCL among the groups and among preoperation, 1?week later, and final follow-up (P > 0.05) while T1S improved at 1?week later and final follow-up with HS2. The final change of all alignment parameters among the three groups was of no differences. ROM decreased and OPCL increased in all groups at the final follow-up (P?<?0.05). UROM and LROM increased with ACDF but kept stable with HS1 and HS2. There was no inter-group difference on the incidence of ASD (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION:Cervical alignment was comparably improved. HS and ACDF provided identified mid-term efficacy, and it was not necessary to have to use prosthesis on three-level CSM.
Project description:Cervical radiculopathy is characterized by dysfunction of the nerve root usually caused by a cervical disk herniation. The most important symptom is pain, radiating from the neck to the arm. When conservative treatment fails, surgical treatment is indicated to relieve symptoms. During the last decades, multiple fusion techniques have been developed, although without clinical evidence for added value of fusion over non-fusion.The surgical procedure of anterior cervical discectomy without fusion is performed step by step, leading to removal of the entire intervertebral disk.Anterior cervical discectomy without fusion is a safe and effective treatment for cervical disk herniation.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Symptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD) is a common degenerative disease, and Discover artificial cervical disc, a new-generation nonconstrained artificial disk, has been developed and performed gradually to treat it. We performed this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety between Discover cervical disc arthroplasty (DCDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for SCDD. METHODS:An exhaustive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials that compared DCDA with ACDF for patients suffering SCDD. A random-effect model was used. Results were reported as standardized mean difference or risk ratio with 95% confidence interval. RESULTS:Of 33 articles identified, six studies were included. Compared with ACDF, DCDA demonstrated shorter operation time (P < 0.0001), and better range of motion (ROM) at the operative level (P < 0.00001). But no significant differences were observed in blood loss, neck disability index (NDI) scores, neck and arm pain scores, Japanese orthopaedic association (JOA) scores, secondary surgery procedures and adverse events (P > 0.05). Subgroup analyses did not demonstrated significant differences. CONCLUSION:In conclusion, DCDA presented shorter operation time, and better ROM at the operative level. However, no significant differences were observed in blood loss, NDI scores, neck and arm pain scores, JOA scores, secondary surgery procedures and adverse events between the two groups. Additionally, more studies of high quality with mid- to long-term follow-up are required in future.
Project description:<h4>Purpose</h4>This study aimed to investigate the mid- to long-term outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of 1-level or 2-level symptomatic cervical disc disease.<h4>Methods</h4>Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials that reported mid- to long-term outcomes (at least 48 months) of CDA versus ACDF. All data were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3 software. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for dichotomous variables. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95%CIs were calculated for continuous variables. A random effect model was used for heterogeneous data; otherwise, a fixed effect model was used.<h4>Results</h4>Eight prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were retrieved in this meta-analysis, including 1317 and 1051 patients in CDA and ACDF groups, respectively. Patients after an ACDF had a significantly lower rate of follow-up than that after CDA. Pooled analysis showed patients in CDA group achieved significantly higher rates of overall success, Neck Disability Index (NDI) success, neurological success and significantly lower rates of implant/surgery-related serious adverse events and secondary procedure compared with that in ACDF group. The long-term functional outcomes (NDI, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) neck and arm pain scores, the Short Form 36 Health Survey physical component score (SF-36 PCS)), patient satisfaction and recommendation, and the incidence of superior adjacent segment degeneration also favored patients in CDA group with statistical difference. Regarding inferior adjacent segment degeneration, patients in CDA group had a lower rate without statistical significance.<h4>Conclusions</h4>This meta-analysis showed that cervical disc arthroplasty was superior over anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease in terms of overall success, NDI success, neurological success, implant/surgery-related serious adverse events, secondary procedure, functional outcomes, patient satisfaction and recommendation, and superior adjacent segment degeneration.
Project description:STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare clinical results and to determine differences in outcomes between anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and disc arthroplasty in patients treated for symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease. METHODS: Forty patients with cervical degenerative disc disease were treated with ProDisc-C disc arthroplasty and 40 patients with fusion using an intervetebral spacer with integrated fixation (Cervios chronoOS) implants without additional anterior fixation. Fifty disc prostheses were placed in the first group and 52 intervertebral spacers were implanted in the second group. Clinical outcomes were assessed before and 12 months following the procedure using the neck disability index (NDI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for neck and arm pain, with 15% improvement in NDI and 20% in VAS defined as a clinically significant. RESULTS: Eighty patients with cervical degenerative disc disease with a mean age of 49.7 years were included in the study with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. The groups were similar at baseline both clinically and statistically (P > .05) except for age and VAS for arm pain. Both groups had a statistically significant improvement in NDI and VAS for neck and arm pain (P < .05) and the arthroplasty group had a better improvement according to NDI (74.3% of patients in the arthroplasty group achieved ≥15% improvement in NDI versus 65.7% of patients in ACDF group). CONCLUSIONS: Both ProDisc C and Cervios chronoOS prostheses resulted in significant pain reduction and functional outcome for the patients with slightly better results in the group treated with disc arthroplasty 12 months after the surgery. [Table: see text] The definiton of the different classes of evidence is available on page 83.
Project description:Study Design Post hoc analysis of prospective, randomized trial. Objective To investigate the disability associated with driving and single-level degenerative, cervical disc disease and to investigate the effect of surgery on driving disability. Methods Post hoc analysis of data obtained from three sites participating in a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial comparing cervical disc arthroplasty (TDA) with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). The driving subscale of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) was analyzed for all patients. A dichotomous severity score was created from the NDI. Statistical comparisons were made within and between groups. Results Two-year follow-up was available for 118/135 (87%) patients. One half of the study population (49.6%) reported moderate or severe preoperative driving difficulty. This disability associated with driving was similar among the two groups (ACDF: 2.5 ± 1.1, TDA: 2.6 ± 1.0, p = 0.646). The majority of patients showed improvement, with no or little driving disability, at the sixth postoperative week (ACDF: 75%, TDA: 90%, p = 0.073). At no follow-up point did a difference exist between groups according to the severity index. Conclusions Many patients suffering from radiculopathy or myelopathy from cervical disc disease are limited in their ability to operate an automobile. Following anterior cervical spine surgery, most patients are able to return to comfortable driving at 6 weeks.
Project description:Cervical radiculopathy is characterized by compression of the roots of the nerve. When conservative treatment fails and symptoms persist or increase in severity, surgical treatment is considered. Anterior cervical discectomy with or without fusion is regarded as the standard treatment for cervical disk herniation. Recently, there is an evolving trend in spinal surgery towards less invasive techniques. Nucleoplasty is a minimally invasive technique in which radiofrequency technology is used for percutaneous decompression. During the last years nucleoplasty has been proven to be a safe and effective treatment to alleviate radiculopathy, caused by a contained disk herniation. Nucleoplasty is usually performed on an outpatient basis and is associated with a fast recovery time. This paper will describe the preoperative and postoperative management of cervical nucleoplasty as well as the surgical technique, accompanied by a video.
Project description:Trinity Evolution® (TE), a viable cellular bone allograft, previously demonstrated high fusion rates and no safety-related concerns after single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures. This prospective multicenter clinical study was performed to assess the radiographic and clinical outcomes of TE in subjects undergoing two-level ACDF procedures.In a prospective, multicenter study, 40 subjects that presented with symptomatic cervical degeneration at two adjacent vertebral levels underwent instrumented ACDF using TE autograft substitute in a polyetherethereketone (PEEK) cage. At 12 months, radiographic fusion status was evaluated by dynamic motion plain radiographs and thin cut CT with multiplanar reconstruction by a panel that was blinded to clinical outcome. Fusion success was defined by angular motion (?4°) and the presence of bridging bone across the adjacent vertebral endplates. Clinical pain and function assessments included the Neck Disability Index (NDI), neck and arm pain as evaluated by visual analog scales (VAS), and SF-36 at both 6 and 12 months.At both 6 and 12 months, all clinical outcome scores (SF-36, NDI, and VAS pain) improved significantly (p?<?0.05) compared to baseline values. There were no adverse events or infections that were attributed to the graft material, no subjects that required revisions, and no significant decreases to mean neurological evaluations at any time as compared to baseline. At 12 months, the per subject and per level fusion rate was 89.4 and 93.4%, respectively. Subgroup analysis of subjects with risk factors for pseudoarthrosis (current or former smokers, diabetic, or obese/extremely obese) compared to those without risk factors demonstrated no significant differences in fusion rates.Patients undergoing two-level ACDF with TE in combination with a PEEK interbody spacer and supplemental anterior fixation had a high rate of fusion success without any serious adverse events related to the graft material.Trinity Evolution in Anterior Cervical Disectomy and Fusion (ACDF) NCT00951938.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is a standard surgical treatment for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy, but reoperations sometimes are performed to treat complications of fusion such as pseudarthrosis and adjacent-segment degeneration. A cervical disc arthroplasty is designed to preserve motion and avoid the shortcomings of fusion. Available evidence suggests that a cervical disc arthroplasty can provide pain relief and functional improvements similar or superior to an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. However, there is controversy regarding whether a cervical disc arthroplasty can reduce the frequency of reoperations.<h4>Questions/purposes</h4>We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion regarding (1) the overall frequency of reoperation at the index and adjacent levels; (2) the frequency of reoperation at the index level; and (3) the frequency of reoperation at the adjacent levels.<h4>Methods</h4>PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched to identify RCTs comparing cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion and reporting the frequency of reoperation. We also manually searched the reference lists of articles and reviews for possible relevant studies. Twelve RCTs with a total of 3234 randomized patients were included. Eight types of disc prostheses were used in the included studies. In the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion group, autograft was used in one study and allograft in 11 studies. Nine of 12 studies were industry sponsored. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and associated 95% CI were calculated for the frequency of reoperation using random-effects or fixed-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies. A funnel plot suggested the possible presence of publication bias in the available pool of studies; that is, the shape of the plot suggests that smaller negative or no-difference studies may have been performed but have not been published, and so were not identified and included in this meta-analysis.<h4>Results</h4>The overall frequency of reoperation at the index and adjacent levels was lower in the cervical disc arthroplasty group (6%; 108/1762) than in the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion group (12%; 171/1472) (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.80; p = 0.002). Subgroup analyses were performed according to secondary surgical level. Compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, cervical disc arthroplasty was associated with fewer reoperations at the index level (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.37-0.68; p < 0.001) and adjacent levels (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.74; p < 0.001).<h4>Conclusions</h4>Cervical disc arthroplasty is associated with fewer reoperations than anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, indicating that it is a safe and effective alternative to fusion for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. However, because of some limitations, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Additional studies are needed.<h4>Level of evidence</h4>Level I, therapeutic study.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite being considered the standard surgical procedure for symptomatic cervical disc disease, anterior cervical decompression and fusion invariably accelerates adjacent segment degeneration. Cervical total disc replacement is a motion-preserving procedure developed as a substitute to fusion. Whether cervical total disc replacement is superior to fusion remains unclear. METHODS:We comprehensively searched PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and the Cochrane Library in accordance with the inclusion criteria to identify possible studies. The retrieved results were last updated on December 12, 2014. We classified the studies as short-term and midterm follow-up. RESULTS:Nineteen randomized controlled trials involving 4516 cases were identified. Compared with anterior cervical decompression and fusion, cervical total disc replacement had better functional outcomes (neck disability index [NDI], NDI success, neurological success, neck pain scores reported on a numerical rating scale [NRS], visual analog scales scores and overall success), greater segmental motion at the index level, fewer adverse events and fewer secondary surgical procedures at the index and adjacent levels in short-term follow-up (P < 0.05). With midterm follow-up, the cervical total disc replacement group indicated superiority in the NDI, neurological success, pain assessment (NRS), and secondary surgical procedures at the index level (P < 0.05). The Short Form 36 (SF-36) and segmental motion at the adjacent level in the short-term follow-up showed no significant difference between the two procedures, as did the secondary surgical procedure rates at the adjacent level with midterm follow-up (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Cervical total disc replacement presented favorable functional outcomes, fewer adverse events, and fewer secondary surgical procedures. The efficacy and safety of cervical total disc replacement are superior to those of fusion. Longer-term, multicenter studies are required for a better evaluation of the long-term efficacy and safety of the two procedures.