Secondary Surgery After Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Versus Fusion for Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease: A Meta-analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis

Overview

Journal Orthop Surg

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2018 Aug 29

PMID 30152612

Citations 6

Authors

Ru-Sen Zhu

Shun-Li Kan

Ze-Gang Cao

Ze-Hua Jiang

Xue-Li Zhang

Wei Hu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to explore whether cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) was superior to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in reducing secondary surgery. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched. Outcomes were reported as relative risk (RR) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). The pooled data was calculated using a random-effect model. We also used the trial sequential analysis (TSA) to further verify our results and obtain more moderate estimates. Twenty-one studies with 4208 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results indicated that compared with ACDF, CDA had fewer frequency of secondary surgery at the index level (RR, 0.47; 95%CI, 0.36-0.63; P < 0.05) and adjacent level (RR, 0.48; 95%CI, 0.36-0.65; P < 0.05), and the differences were statistically significant. In addition, in terms of the overall frequency of secondary surgery at the index and adjacent level, CDA was also significantly superior to ACDF (RR, 0.49; 95%CI, 0.41-0.60; P < 0.05). TSA demonstrated that adequate and decisive evidence had been established. Regarding the frequency of secondary surgery, CDA was significantly superior to ACDF. It was supposed that CDA may be a better surgical intervention to reduce the rate of secondary surgery for patients with cervical degenerative disc disease.

Citing Articles

Comparison of discover cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc diseases: A meta-analysis of prospective, randomized controlled trials.

Wang Z, Luo G, Yu H, Zhao H, Li T, Yang H Front Surg. 2023; 10:1124423.

PMID: 36896262 PMC: 9989026. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1124423.

Outcomes of cervical arthroplasty versus anterior cervical arthrodesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials with a minimum follow-up of 7-year.

Nunez J, Escudero B, Omiste I, Martinez-Penas J, Surroca M, Alonzo-Gonzalez F Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2022; 33(5):1875-1884.

PMID: 35986813 DOI: 10.1007/s00590-022-03365-1.

Outcomes After Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Versus Stand-Alone Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Meta-Analysis.

Gendreau J, Kim L, Prins P, DSouza M, Rezaii P, Pendharkar A Global Spine J. 2020; 10(8):1046-1056.

PMID: 32875831 PMC: 7645085. DOI: 10.1177/2192568219888448.

Multilevel cervical arthroplasty-clinical and radiological outcomes.

Reinas R, Kitumba D, Pereira L, Baptista A, Alves O J Spine Surg. 2020; 6(1):233-242.

PMID: 32309661 PMC: 7154349. DOI: 10.21037/jss.2020.01.09.

Analysis of re-operations after cervical total disc replacement in a consecutive series of 535 patients receiving the ProDisc-C device.

Zigler J, Guyer R, Blumenthal S, Ohnmeiss D Eur Spine J. 2020; 29(11):2683-2687.

PMID: 32277335 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-020-06399-3.

References

Kjaergard L, Villumsen J, Gluud C . Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2001; 135(11):982-9. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-135-11-200112040-00010. View

Bertagnoli R, Duggal N, Pickett G, Wigfield C, Gill S, Karg A . Cervical total disc replacement, part two: clinical results. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005; 36(3):355-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.ocl.2005.02.009. View

Liao J, Niu C, Chen W, Chen L . Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage filled with cancellous allograft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Int Orthop. 2007; 32(5):643-8. PMC: 2551716. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-007-0378-x. View

Wetterslev J, Thorlund K, Brok J, Gluud C . Trial sequential analysis may establish when firm evidence is reached in cumulative meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007; 61(1):64-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.013. View

Brok J, Thorlund K, Wetterslev J, Gluud C . Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive--Trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses. Int J Epidemiol. 2008; 38(1):287-98. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyn188. View

Nabhan A, Steudel W, Nabhan A, Pape D, Ishak B . Segmental kinematics and adjacent level degeneration following disc replacement versus fusion: RCT with three years of follow-up. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2008; 17(3):229-36. DOI: 10.1615/jlongtermeffmedimplants.v17.i3.60. View

Heller J, Sasso R, Papadopoulos S, Anderson P, Fessler R, Hacker R . Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008; 34(2):101-7. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818ee263. View

Bartels R, Donk R, Verbeek A . No justification for cervical disk prostheses in clinical practice: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Neurosurgery. 2010; 66(6):1153-60. DOI: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000369189.09182.5F. View

Moon H, Kim J, Kim J, Kwon T, Chung H, Park Y . The effects of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with stand-alone cages at two contiguous levels on cervical alignment and outcomes. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2010; 153(3):559-65. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-010-0879-z. View

10.

Zhang X, Zhang X, Chen C, Zhang Y, Wang Z, Wang B . Randomized, controlled, multicenter, clinical trial comparing BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion in China. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011; 37(6):433-8. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822699fa. View

11.

Coric D, Nunley P, Guyer R, Musante D, Carmody C, Gordon C . Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kineflex|C artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011; 15(4):348-58. DOI: 10.3171/2011.5.SPINE10769. View

12.

Sasso R, Anderson P, Riew K, Heller J . Results of cervical arthroplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: four-year clinical outcomes in a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93(18):1684-92. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00476. View

13.

Zigler J, Delamarter R, Murrey D, Spivak J, Janssen M . ProDisc-C and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as surgical treatment for single-level cervical symptomatic degenerative disc disease: five-year results of a Food and Drug Administration study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012; 38(3):203-9. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318278eb38. View

14.

Xu R, Bydon M, Macki M, de la Garza-Ramos R, Sciubba D, Wolinsky J . Adjacent segment disease after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: clinical outcomes after first repeat surgery versus second repeat surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013; 39(2):120-6. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000074. View

15.

Vaccaro A, Beutler W, Peppelman W, Marzluff J, Highsmith J, Mugglin A . Clinical outcomes with selectively constrained SECURE-C cervical disc arthroplasty: two-year results from a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013; 38(26):2227-39. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000031. View

16.

Ren C, Song Y, Xue Y, Yang X . Mid- to long-term outcomes after cervical disc arthroplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Spine J. 2014; 23(5):1115-23. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3220-3. View

17.

Nandyala S, Marquez-Lara A, Fineberg S, Singh K . Comparison of revision surgeries for one- to two-level cervical TDR and ACDF from 2002 to 2011. Spine J. 2014; 14(12):2841-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.03.037. View

18.

Park J, Shin J, Lim J . Biomechanical analysis of disc pressure and facet contact force after simulated two-level cervical surgeries (fusion and arthroplasty) and hybrid surgery. World Neurosurg. 2014; 82(6):1388-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2014.06.013. View

19.

Kenneth Burkus J, Traynelis V, Haid Jr R, Mummaneni P . Clinical and radiographic analysis of an artificial cervical disc: 7-year follow-up from the Prestige prospective randomized controlled clinical trial: Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014; 21(4):516-28. DOI: 10.3171/2014.6.SPINE13996. View

20.

Zhang H, Shao Y, Chen Y, Hou Y, Cheng L, Si M . A prospective, randomised, controlled multicentre study comparing cervical disc replacement with anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Int Orthop. 2014; 38(12):2533-41. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-014-2497-5. View