Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27314663›Full record

SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2017

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) versus cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) for two contiguous levels cervical disc degenerative disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Shihua Zou, Junyi Gao, Bin Xu, Xiangdong Lu, Yongbin Han, Hui Meng

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in 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, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05522010 (Dynamic Cervical Implant), which is not on this map. Cited by 67 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
9.7field-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.

NCT05522010 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Dynamic Cervical Implant (DCI) Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy And Fusion(ACDF) For The Treatment Of Single-Level Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD): An RCT

TypeinterventionalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2022 to 2024Enrolled50ConditionsCervical Degenerative Disc DiseaseArmsCervical spine surgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

67 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 132 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. The Norwegian Cervical Arthroplasty Trial (NORCAT): 2-year clinical outcome after single-level cervical arthroplasty versus fusion-a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, controlled multicenter study.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 · 2017
    Trial
  13. Article
  14. Patient factors outweigh procedure extent in infection risk after cervical disc arthroplasty.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 · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shihua ZouFirst Clinical Medical College of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.
Junyi GaoFirst Clinical Medical College of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.
Bin XuDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Jie fang nan lu Street, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China. zsh877816@126.com.
Xiangdong LuDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Jie fang nan lu Street, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China.
Yongbin HanDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Jie fang nan lu Street, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China.
Hui MengFirst Clinical Medical College of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.
Shanxi Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been considered as a gold standard for symptomatic cervical disc degeneration (CDD), which may result in progressive degeneration of the adjacent segments. The artificial cervical disc was designed to reduce the number of lesions in the adjacent segments. Clinical studies have demonstrated equivalence of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in single segment cervical disc degeneration. But for two contiguous levels cervical disc degeneration (CDD), which kind of treatment method is better is controversial. PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical effects requiring surgical intervention between anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) at two contiguous levels cervical disc degeneration.

methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search in multiple databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EBSCO and EMBASE. We identified that six reports meet inclusion criteria. Two independent reviewers performed the data extraction from archives. Data analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3.

resultsAfter applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, six papers were included in meta-analyses. The overall sample size at baseline was 650 patients (317 in the TDR group and 333 in the ACDF group). The results of the meta-analysis indicated that the CDA patients had significant superiorities in mean blood loss (P < 0.00001, standard mean differences (SMD) = -0.85, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = -1.22 to -0.48); reoperation (P = 0.0009, risk ratio (RR) = 0.28, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 0.13-0.59), adjacent segment degeneration (P < 0.00001, risk ratio (RR) = 0.48, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 0.40-0.58) and Neck Disability Index (P = 0.002, SMD = 0.31, 95 % CI = 0.12-0.50). No significant difference was identified between the two groups regarding mean surgical time (P = 0.84, SMD = -0.04, 95 % CI = -0.40 to 0.32), neck and arm pain scores (P = 0.52, SMD = 0.06, 95 % CI = -0.13 to 0.25) reported on a visual analog scale and rate of postoperative complications [risk ratio (RR) = 0.79; 95 % CI = 0.50-1.25; P = 0.31]. The CDA group of sagittal range of motion (ROM) of the operated and adjacent levels, functional segment units (FSU) and C2-7 is superior to ACDF group by radiographic data of peroperation, postoperation and follow-up.

conclusionWe can learn from this meta-analysis that the cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) group is equivalent and in some aspects has more significant clinical outcomes than the ACDF group at two contiguous levels CDD.

Indexed as

ArthroplastyCervical VertebraeDiskectomyHumansIntervertebral Disc DegenerationNeck PainOperative TimePain MeasurementPostoperative ComplicationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRange of Motion, ArticularReoperationSpinal FusionTreatment OutcomeAnterior cervical discectomy fusionCervical disc arthroplastyCervical disc degenerationMeta-analysisTwo contiguous levels

Identifiers

PMID27314663
OpenAlexW2424326616

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.