This article compares the outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery with artificial cervical disc replacement (ACDR) for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD). The study analyzed 30 prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and found that ACDR had better overall success, neurological success, and NDI success rates compared to ACDF in all follow-up periods. ACDR also had lower rates of dysphagia/dysphonia, adjacent segment disease (ASD), and reoperation. Both procedures had comparable lengths of hospital stay and blood loss. The study concludes that ACDR is as effective as ACDF and may have superior outcomes in certain success rates, while also reducing the risk of complications
Summarised by Mr Mo Akmal – Lead Spinal Surgeon
The London Spine Unit : the highest rated spinal facility in the world
Published article
CONCLUSIONS: ACDR is as effective as ACDF and superior for some success rates. Disc replacement can reduce the risk of dysphagia/dysphonia, ASD, and re-operation.
Cervical Disc Replacement Surgery Expert. Best Spinal Surgeon UK
Abstract Purpose: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery is commonly performed to treat cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD). The lost of range of motion (ROM) is also found after ACDF, which contributes to degenerate in adjacent segment disease (ASD). Artificial cervical disc replacement (ACDR), an alternative to ACDF, is developed to preserve the ROM,
Abstract
Purpose: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery is commonly performed to treat cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD). The lost of range of motion (ROM) is also found after ACDF, which contributes to degenerate in adjacent segment disease (ASD). Artificial cervical disc replacement (ACDR), an alternative to ACDF, is developed to preserve the ROM and reduce ASD. This article aims to compare the outcomes between ACDR and ACDF in the short-, mid-, and long-term.
Methods: Databases including Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched. Only RCTs were included in this meta-analysis, and the search strategy followed the requirements of the Cochrane Handbook. The strength of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of each included study and extracted the relevant data.
Results: Thirty prospective RCTs were included. Prolonged operative duration, better overall success, neurological success, and NDI success rates were found in ACDR group in all follow-up periods, with lower dysphagia/dysphonia during short-term follow-up. Moreover, a lower ASD was found in ACDR group during long-term follow-up and overall analysis, with lower reoperation rates in all follow-up periods. Comparable length of hospital stay and blood loss were found in both groups. Moreover, ASD was similar in short- and mid-term follow-ups, while dysphagia/dysphonia incidence was similar in mid- and long-term follow-ups. The incidence of implant events was comparable in all follow-up periods (p > 0.05).
Conclusions: ACDR is as effective as ACDF and superior for some success rates. Disc replacement can reduce the risk of dysphagia/dysphonia, ASD, and re-operation.
Keywords: Cervical degenerative disc disease; Disc replacement; Meta-analysis; Randomized controlled trial; Spinal fusion.
The London Spine Unit : the highest rated spinal facility in the world
Read the original publication:
A meta-analysis comparing the short- and mid- to long-term outcomes of artificial cervical disc replacement(ACDR) with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease