Department of Neurosurgery and Innovative Medicine, Irkutsk State Medical University.
Irkutsk Scientific Center of Surgery and Traumatology, Irkutsk, Russia.
Clin Spine Surg. 2020 Jun;33(5):192-200. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000929.
STUDY DESIGN: This study was a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). OBJECTIVE: We investigated the mid-term to long-term outcomes of cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) versus anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the surgical treatment of symptomatic cervical disk degenerative disease. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: ACDF has been widely performed for the surgical treatment of symptomatic cervical disk degenerative disease. However, the loss of motion at the operated level has been hypothesized to accelerate adjacent-level disk degeneration. CDA was designed to preserve motion segments and decrease the risk/rate of adjacent segment degeneration. However, it is still uncertain whether mid-term to long-term outcomes after CDA is more effective and safer than those observed after ACDF. METHODS: Two independent reviewers conducted a search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases for RCTs with a minimum of 48 months of follow-up. For dichotomous variables, the risk ratio and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. For continuous variables, the standardized mean difference and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs, finally, were included. The rate of neurological success in the CDA group was not significantly different from that in the ACDF group. The pooled results show that patients who underwent CDA had a significantly greater improvement in Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Short Form 36 Health Survey physical component (SF-36 HSPC) than did those who underwent ACDF. No significant difference was found when comparing the neck and arm pain scores between the CDA and ACDF groups. The overall rate of secondary surgical procedures was significantly lower in patients who underwent CDA than in those who underwent ACDF. We observed similar overall rates of adverse events and adjacent segment degeneration when comparing the CDA group with the ACDF group. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides evidence suggesting that CDA was superior to ACDF in terms of NDI score, SF-36 HSPC score, and low rate of secondary surgical procedures. Furthermore, no significant differences existed between the CDA group and the ACDF group in the neck pain visual analog scale score, arm pain visual analog scale score, the rate of neurological success, adjacent segment degeneration, and adverse events. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1.
研究设计:本研究是对已发表的随机对照试验(RCT)进行的荟萃分析。
目的:我们旨在研究颈椎间盘置换术(CDA)与颈椎前路间盘切除融合术(ACDF)治疗症状性颈椎间盘退行性疾病的中期至长期疗效。
背景资料概要:ACDF 已广泛应用于治疗症状性颈椎间盘退行性疾病。然而,有人假设手术节段活动度的丧失会加速相邻节段椎间盘的退行性变。CDA 的设计目的是保留运动节段并降低相邻节段退变的风险/发生率。然而,目前仍不确定 CDA 的中期至长期疗效是否优于 ACDF。
方法:两位独立的审查员对 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库进行了搜索,纳入了至少随访 48 个月的 RCT。对于二分类变量,计算风险比和 95%置信区间。对于连续变量,计算标准化均数差和 95%置信区间。
结果:最终纳入 11 项 RCT。CDA 组的神经功能成功概率与 ACDF 组无显著差异。汇总结果表明,CDA 组患者的颈部残疾指数(NDI)和 36 健康调查简表躯体成分(SF-36 HSPC)评分改善明显优于 ACDF 组。两组间颈部和手臂疼痛评分无显著差异。与 ACDF 相比,CDA 组的二次手术率明显更低。比较 CDA 组和 ACDF 组时,我们观察到两组不良事件和相邻节段退变的总体发生率相似。
结论:本荟萃分析提供的证据表明,在 NDI 评分、SF-36 HSPC 评分和低二次手术率方面,CDA 优于 ACDF。此外,在颈部疼痛视觉模拟评分、手臂疼痛视觉模拟评分、神经功能成功概率、相邻节段退变和不良事件方面,CDA 组与 ACDF 组无显著差异。
证据等级:1 级。
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2016-12-1
J Neurosurg Spine. 2019-11-1
Int J Spine Surg. 2024-11-8
J Orthop Surg Res. 2024-4-3
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2023-10-15
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2023-1