Effect of device constraint: a comparative network meta-analysis of ACDF and cervical disc arthroplasty

Clinical trials have demonstrated that cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is an effective and safe alternative treatment to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for cervical degenerative disc disease in the appropriately indicated patient population. Various devices for CDA exist, differing...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The spine journal 2024-10, Vol.24 (10), p.1858-1871
Hauptverfasser: Zavras, Athan G., Acosta, Jonathan R., Holmberg, Kyle J., Semenza, Nicholas C., Jayamohan, Hareindra R., Cheng, Boyle C., Altman, Daniel T., Sauber, Ryan D.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Clinical trials have demonstrated that cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is an effective and safe alternative treatment to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for cervical degenerative disc disease in the appropriately indicated patient population. Various devices for CDA exist, differing in the level of device constraint. To investigate outcomes following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) versus CDA stratified based on the level of device constraint: Constrained, Semiconstrained, and Unconstrained. Systematic review and network meta-analysis. A total of 2,932 CDA patients (979 Constrained, 1,214 Semiconstrained, 739 Unconstrained) and 2,601 ACDF patients from 41 studies that compared outcomes of patients undergoing CDA or ACDF at a single level at a minimum of 2 years follow-up. Outcomes of interest included the development of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), index and adjacent segment reoperation rates, range of motion (ROM), high-grade heterotopic ossification (HO, McAfee Grades 3/4), and patient-reported outcomes (NDI/VAS). CDA devices were grouped based on the degrees of freedom (DoF) allowed by the device, as either Constrained (3 DoF), Semiconstrained (4 or 5 DoF), or Unconstrained (6 DoF). A random effects network meta-analysis was conducted using standardized mean differences (SMD) and log relative risk (RR) were used to analyze continuous and categorical data, respectively. Semiconstrained (p=.03) and Unconstrained CDA (p=.01) demonstrated a significantly lower risk for ASD than ACDF. All levels of CDA constraint demonstrated a significantly lower risk for subsequent adjacent segment surgery than ACDF (p
ISSN:1529-9430
1878-1632
1878-1632
DOI:10.1016/j.spinee.2024.05.016