Gao Fuqiang, Mao Tianli, Sun Wei, Guo Wanshou, Wang Yunting, Li Zirong, Abhinav Pradhan
*Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Beijing Key Laboratory of Arthritic and Rheumatic Diseases, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China, Beijing, China †Department of Orthopedic Surgery, China-Japan Friendship clinical medical school, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015 Dec;40(23):1816-23. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001138.
A meta-analysis of published randomized controlled Trials (RCTs).
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of one-level cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD).
ACDF has been widely performed for the treatment of CDDD. However, the loss of motion at the operated level has been hypothesized to accelerated adjacent-level disc degeneration. CDA is designed to avoid the side effect of fusion. However, it is still uncertain whether CDA is more effective and safer than ACDF.
We performed a meta-analysis of published RCTs to examine whether there was a superior clinical effects of CDA than ACDF. A PubMed database search through October 2014 was performed for relevant studies. We included RCTs that reported relevant data in the treatment of one-level CDDD, which were suitable for detailed extraction of data.
We identified 18 RCTs eligible for analysis. The results of the meta-analysis indicated longer operative times, more blood loss, lower neck and arm pain scores reported on a visual analog scale (VAS), better neurological success, greater motion at the operated level, fewer secondary surgical procedures in the CDA group than in the ACDF group (P < 0.05). The 2 groups had similar lengths of hospital stay, Neck Disability Index scores, and rates of adverse events (P > 0.05).
Findings of the present meta-analysis indicated that CDA was an effective and safe surgical procedure for the treatment of one-level CDDD, and CDA was found to be more superior than ACDF in terms of VAS neck and arm pain, neurological success, range of motion at the operated level, and secondary surgical procedures.
已发表的随机对照试验(RCT)的荟萃分析。
本研究旨在比较颈椎间盘置换术(CDA)与颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)治疗单节段颈椎退行性椎间盘疾病(CDDD)的疗效和安全性。
ACDF已广泛用于治疗CDDD。然而,手术节段活动度的丧失被认为会加速相邻节段椎间盘退变。CDA旨在避免融合的副作用。然而,CDA是否比ACDF更有效和更安全仍不确定。
我们对已发表的RCT进行荟萃分析,以检验CDA是否比ACDF具有更好的临床效果。通过检索PubMed数据库至2014年10月,查找相关研究。我们纳入了报告单节段CDDD治疗相关数据且适合详细数据提取的RCT。
我们确定了18项符合分析条件的RCT。荟萃分析结果表明,与ACDF组相比,CDA组手术时间更长、失血量更多、视觉模拟量表(VAS)上的颈部和手臂疼痛评分更低、神经功能改善更好、手术节段活动度更大、二次手术更少(P<0.05)。两组在住院时间、颈部残疾指数评分和不良事件发生率方面相似(P>0.05)。
本荟萃分析结果表明,CDA是治疗单节段CDDD的一种有效且安全的手术方法,并且在VAS颈部和手臂疼痛、神经功能改善、手术节段活动度范围以及二次手术方面,CDA比ACDF更具优势。
1级。