Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27162712›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2016

Prospective, Randomized Comparison of One-level Mobi-C Cervical Total Disc Replacement vs. Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Results at 5-year Follow-up.

Michael S Hisey, Jack E Zigler, Robert Jackson, Pierce D Nunley, Hyun W Bae, Kee D Kim, Donna D Ohnmeiss

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03077516 (Post-Market, Long-Term Follow Up of Mobi-C® Cervical Disc for One and Two Level Treatment of Cervical Disc Disease), which is not on this map. Cited by 66 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
18.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03077516 completednot on this map

Post-Market, Long-Term Follow Up of Mobi-C® Cervical Disc for One and Two Level Treatment of Cervical Disc Disease

TypeobservationalSponsorLDR Spine USARan2016 to 2019Enrolled216ConditionsCervical Disc Disease, Cervical Disc DegenerationArmsMobi-C
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

66 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 130 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Cervical radiculopathy: is a prosthesis preferred over fusion surgery? A systematic review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. The association of cervical sagittal alignment with adjacent segment degeneration.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2020
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Adjacent Segment Degeneration Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus the Bryan Cervical Disc Arthroplasty.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2017
    Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Michael S HiseyTexas Back Institute, Denton, Texas.
Jack E ZiglerTexas Back Institute, Plano, Texas.
Robert JacksonSaddleback Memorial Medical Center, Laguna Hills, California.
Pierce D NunleySpine Institute of Louisiana, Shreveport, Louisiana.
Hyun W BaeCedars Sinai Spine Center, Los Angeles, California.
Kee D KimDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California.
Donna D OhnmeissTexas Back Institute Research Foundation, Plano, Texas.
Texas Back Institute · USCedars-Sinai Medical Center · USSaddleback Memorial Medical Center · USSpine Institute of Louisiana · USUniversity of California, Davis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is increasing interest in the role of cervical total disc replacement (TDR) as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Multiple prospective randomized studies with minimum 2 year follow-up have shown TDR to be at least as safe and effective as ACDF in treating symptomatic degenerative disc disease at a single level. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of cervical TDR using the Mobi-C(®) with ACDF at 5-year follow-up.

methodsThis prospective, randomized, controlled trial was conducted as a Food and Drug Administration regulated Investigational Device Exemption trial across 23 centers with 245 patients randomized (2:1) to receive TDR with Mobi-C(®) Cervical Disc Prosthesis or ACDF with anterior plate and allograft. Outcome assessments included a composite overall success score, Neck Disability Index (NDI), visual analog scales (VAS) assessing neck and arm pain, Short Form-12 (SF-12) health survey, patient satisfaction, major complications, subsequent surgery, segmental range of motion, and adjacent segment degeneration.

resultsThe 60-month follow-up rate was 85.5% for the TDR group and 78.9% for the ACDF group. The composite overall success was 61.9% with TDR vs. 52.2% with ACDF, demonstrating statistical non-inferiority. Improvements in NDI, VAS neck and arm pain, and SF-12 scores were similar between groups and were maintained from earlier follow-up through 60 months. There was no significant difference between TDR and ACDF in adverse events or major complications. Range of motion was maintained with TDR through 60 months. Device-related subsequent surgeries (TDR: 3.0%, ACDF: 11.1%, p<0.02) and adjacent segment degeneration at the superior level (TDR: 37.1%, ACDF: 54.7%, p<0.03) were significantly lower for TDR patients.

conclusionsFive-year results demonstrate the safety and efficacy of TDR with the Mobi-C as a viable alternative to ACDF with the potential advantage of lower rates of reoperation and adjacent segment degeneration, in the treatment of one-level symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This prospective, randomized study with 5-year follow-up adds to the existing literature indicating that cervical TDR is a viable alternative to ACDF in appropriately selected patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: This is a Level I study.

Indexed as

anterior cervical fusionartificial disccervical arthroplastyCervical Spineclinical outcomedegenerative disc diseaseMobi-C® Cervical Disc Prosthesisrandomized trialtotal disc replacement

Identifiers

PMID27162712
PMCPMC4852596
OpenAlexW2384202814

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.