BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is the leading surgical treatment for cervical radiculopathy. However, ACDF surgery has been suggested for to accelerate the degeneration of the adjacent cervical discs, which causes so-called adjacent segment disease (ASD). Over the past 2 decades, total disc replacement (TDR)/cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has become an increasingly common method for treating degenerative cervical diseases. The rationale is that a synthetic disc prosthesis may preserve motion at the operated level, which is expected to lead to reduced stress on the other cervical levels and thus decrease the risk of developing ASD. However, since the method was first introduced in the early 2000s, the long-term outcome after it is still not completely understood.

PURPOSE

Our goal was to compare the long-term outcomes of TDR and ACDF procedures.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case-control study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

All patients who underwent TDR due to degenerative cervical disease at Helsinki University Hospital between 2006 and 2012 (38 patients) and matched control patients who underwent ACDF during this period (76 patients) for degenerative disc disease.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the rate of reoperations and further cervical surgeries. Secondary outcome measures included neck symptoms (Neck Disability Index, or NDI), health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), satisfaction with the surgery, radiological outcomes, and employment status.

METHODS

The medical records of all patients who underwent TDR due to degenerative cervical disease at Helsinki University Hospital between 2006 and 2012 and those of the matched control patients were analyzed retrospectively. Questionnaires were sent to all available patients at the end of the follow-up (median 14 years) to evaluate their employment status, levels of satisfaction with the surgery, current neck symptoms, and health-related quality of life. Radiological outcomes were evaluated from the cervical plain radiographs, which were taken either at the end of the follow-up as a part of the present study or earlier on for other clinical reasons, but at least 2 years after index surgery.

RESULTS

The total rate of reoperations and further cervical surgeries during the follow-up of a median of 14 years was 7/38 (18%) in the TDR group and 6/76 (8%) in the ACDF group (p=.096, ns.). Total disc replacement patients were reoperated earlier, and the 5-year reoperation rate was significantly higher in the TDR group (11% vs 1.3%, p=.026). None of the TDR patients underwent further cervical surgery more than 6 years after index surgery, whereas 5/6 (83%) of the reoperated ACDF patients were reoperated after that time. There were no significant differences in the NDIs between the patient groups. The employment rate and health-related quality of life were slightly higher in the TDR group, but the differences were statistically nonsignificant. TDR was significantly better at maintaining the angular range of motion at the operated level, and the fusion rate was significantly lower among this group.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in the long-term outcomes of ACDF and TDR when measured by reoperation rates, employment status, NDI, EuroQoL, and satisfaction with surgery. Reoperation rate and, on the other hand, employment rate and health-related quality of life, were higher in the TDR group, but the differences were statistically nonsignificant. However, TDR patients were reoperated earlier, and the 5-year reoperation rate was significantly higher in the TDR group. Randomized long-term studies in which these methods are compared are needed to further clarify the differences between them.