Artificial Discs in Cervical Disc Replacement: A Meta-Analysis for Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes

Waseem Wahood, Yagiz Ugur Yolcu, Panagiotis Kerezoudis, Anshit Goyal, Mohammed Ali Alvi, Brett A. Freedman, Mohamad Bydon

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Background: Cervical disc replacement (CDR) has emerged as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the surgical treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. Although comparison of the 2 techniques has been studied in the literature, a thorough assessment of all artificial discs between each has not been performed. The objective of the present study was to examine the long-term outcomes of 5 artificial discs. Methods: An electronic literature search was conducted for studies of CDR devices for all years available. Only articles in English were included. Heterotopic ossification, adjacent segment disease, and reoperation comprised the primary outcomes of interest. Pooled descriptive statistics with effect size (ES) and 95% confidence interval were used to synthesize the outcomes for each device. Results: Sixty-five studies (n = 5785) were included in the analysis. Comparison of the incidence of grade III/IV heterotopic ossification showed a significant variability between the 5 devices (P < 0.001) with ProDisc-C (ES, 38%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24%–54%) having the highest incidence rate. Overall rate of adjacent segment disease was 14% (95% CI, 7%–23%) with significant associated heterogeneity (P < 0.001). Regarding 2-year reoperation risk, the overall incidence rate was 2% (95% CI, 1%–3%), with nonsignificant variability between devices (P = 0.63). The highest rate was observed in the Discover group (ES, 4%; 95% CI, 0%–13%). Conclusions: The results of the present meta-analysis indicate that surgical and clinical outcomes may differ among different CDR devices. These findings may assist surgeons in tailoring their decision making to specific patient profiles. Future multicenter efforts are needed to validate associations found in this study.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalWorld neurosurgery
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Meta-Analysis
Confidence Intervals
Equipment and Supplies
Heterotopic Ossification
Reoperation
Incidence
Diskectomy
Decision Making
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • ASD
  • Bryan
  • CDR
  • Discover
  • Heterotopic ossification
  • Mobi-C
  • Prestige-LP
  • ProDisc-C
  • Reoperation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Artificial Discs in Cervical Disc Replacement : A Meta-Analysis for Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes. / Wahood, Waseem; Yolcu, Yagiz Ugur; Kerezoudis, Panagiotis; Goyal, Anshit; Alvi, Mohammed Ali; Freedman, Brett A.; Bydon, Mohamad.

In: World neurosurgery, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Wahood, Waseem ; Yolcu, Yagiz Ugur ; Kerezoudis, Panagiotis ; Goyal, Anshit ; Alvi, Mohammed Ali ; Freedman, Brett A. ; Bydon, Mohamad. / Artificial Discs in Cervical Disc Replacement : A Meta-Analysis for Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes. In: World neurosurgery. 2019.
@article{7834c826db58436b8a975a6168e871d0,
title = "Artificial Discs in Cervical Disc Replacement: A Meta-Analysis for Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes",
abstract = "Background: Cervical disc replacement (CDR) has emerged as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the surgical treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. Although comparison of the 2 techniques has been studied in the literature, a thorough assessment of all artificial discs between each has not been performed. The objective of the present study was to examine the long-term outcomes of 5 artificial discs. Methods: An electronic literature search was conducted for studies of CDR devices for all years available. Only articles in English were included. Heterotopic ossification, adjacent segment disease, and reoperation comprised the primary outcomes of interest. Pooled descriptive statistics with effect size (ES) and 95{\%} confidence interval were used to synthesize the outcomes for each device. Results: Sixty-five studies (n = 5785) were included in the analysis. Comparison of the incidence of grade III/IV heterotopic ossification showed a significant variability between the 5 devices (P < 0.001) with ProDisc-C (ES, 38{\%}; 95{\%} confidence interval [CI], 24{\%}–54{\%}) having the highest incidence rate. Overall rate of adjacent segment disease was 14{\%} (95{\%} CI, 7{\%}–23{\%}) with significant associated heterogeneity (P < 0.001). Regarding 2-year reoperation risk, the overall incidence rate was 2{\%} (95{\%} CI, 1{\%}–3{\%}), with nonsignificant variability between devices (P = 0.63). The highest rate was observed in the Discover group (ES, 4{\%}; 95{\%} CI, 0{\%}–13{\%}). Conclusions: The results of the present meta-analysis indicate that surgical and clinical outcomes may differ among different CDR devices. These findings may assist surgeons in tailoring their decision making to specific patient profiles. Future multicenter efforts are needed to validate associations found in this study.",
keywords = "ASD, Bryan, CDR, Discover, Heterotopic ossification, Mobi-C, Prestige-LP, ProDisc-C, Reoperation",
author = "Waseem Wahood and Yolcu, {Yagiz Ugur} and Panagiotis Kerezoudis and Anshit Goyal and Alvi, {Mohammed Ali} and Freedman, {Brett A.} and Mohamad Bydon",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.wneu.2019.10.032",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "World Neurosurgery",
issn = "1878-8750",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Artificial Discs in Cervical Disc Replacement

T2 - A Meta-Analysis for Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes

AU - Wahood, Waseem

AU - Yolcu, Yagiz Ugur

AU - Kerezoudis, Panagiotis

AU - Goyal, Anshit

AU - Alvi, Mohammed Ali

AU - Freedman, Brett A.

AU - Bydon, Mohamad

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Background: Cervical disc replacement (CDR) has emerged as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the surgical treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. Although comparison of the 2 techniques has been studied in the literature, a thorough assessment of all artificial discs between each has not been performed. The objective of the present study was to examine the long-term outcomes of 5 artificial discs. Methods: An electronic literature search was conducted for studies of CDR devices for all years available. Only articles in English were included. Heterotopic ossification, adjacent segment disease, and reoperation comprised the primary outcomes of interest. Pooled descriptive statistics with effect size (ES) and 95% confidence interval were used to synthesize the outcomes for each device. Results: Sixty-five studies (n = 5785) were included in the analysis. Comparison of the incidence of grade III/IV heterotopic ossification showed a significant variability between the 5 devices (P < 0.001) with ProDisc-C (ES, 38%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24%–54%) having the highest incidence rate. Overall rate of adjacent segment disease was 14% (95% CI, 7%–23%) with significant associated heterogeneity (P < 0.001). Regarding 2-year reoperation risk, the overall incidence rate was 2% (95% CI, 1%–3%), with nonsignificant variability between devices (P = 0.63). The highest rate was observed in the Discover group (ES, 4%; 95% CI, 0%–13%). Conclusions: The results of the present meta-analysis indicate that surgical and clinical outcomes may differ among different CDR devices. These findings may assist surgeons in tailoring their decision making to specific patient profiles. Future multicenter efforts are needed to validate associations found in this study.

AB - Background: Cervical disc replacement (CDR) has emerged as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the surgical treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. Although comparison of the 2 techniques has been studied in the literature, a thorough assessment of all artificial discs between each has not been performed. The objective of the present study was to examine the long-term outcomes of 5 artificial discs. Methods: An electronic literature search was conducted for studies of CDR devices for all years available. Only articles in English were included. Heterotopic ossification, adjacent segment disease, and reoperation comprised the primary outcomes of interest. Pooled descriptive statistics with effect size (ES) and 95% confidence interval were used to synthesize the outcomes for each device. Results: Sixty-five studies (n = 5785) were included in the analysis. Comparison of the incidence of grade III/IV heterotopic ossification showed a significant variability between the 5 devices (P < 0.001) with ProDisc-C (ES, 38%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24%–54%) having the highest incidence rate. Overall rate of adjacent segment disease was 14% (95% CI, 7%–23%) with significant associated heterogeneity (P < 0.001). Regarding 2-year reoperation risk, the overall incidence rate was 2% (95% CI, 1%–3%), with nonsignificant variability between devices (P = 0.63). The highest rate was observed in the Discover group (ES, 4%; 95% CI, 0%–13%). Conclusions: The results of the present meta-analysis indicate that surgical and clinical outcomes may differ among different CDR devices. These findings may assist surgeons in tailoring their decision making to specific patient profiles. Future multicenter efforts are needed to validate associations found in this study.

KW - ASD

KW - Bryan

KW - CDR

KW - Discover

KW - Heterotopic ossification

KW - Mobi-C

KW - Prestige-LP

KW - ProDisc-C

KW - Reoperation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85075497707&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85075497707&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.10.032

DO - 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.10.032

M3 - Review article

C2 - 31627001

AN - SCOPUS:85075497707

JO - World Neurosurgery

JF - World Neurosurgery

SN - 1878-8750

ER -