ReviewInternational orthopaedics2019
Cervical disc arthroplasty: tips and tricks.
Review in International orthopaedics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-Term Comparison of Single-Level Bryan and ProDisc-C Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Minimum 10-year Follow-Up of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Impact of Surgeon Procedural Volume on Outcomes Following Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- Technological Innovation in Cervical Spine Injury and Disease Treatment: A Systematic Bibliometric Review of Current Trends and Literature on Patent Technology.Spine surgery and related research · 2026Review
- Cervical disk arthroplasty: The new gold standard?Bulletin of the Hospital for Joint Disease (2013) · 2025Review
- Reoperation Strategy for Failure of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty at Index and Adjacent Levels.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- The Anteroposterior Positioning of Viscoelastic Cervical Disc Prosthesis Does Not Alter the Outcomes.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Restore cervical sagittal alignment by cervical disc arthroplasty and systematic total bilateral uncuscectomy in severe spondylosis: A prospective study.Brain & spine · 2023Article
- Cervical disc arthroplasty with systematic total bilateral uncuscectomy - Adapted technique particularly in severe spondylosis: A prospective study.Brain & spine · 2023Article
- Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty: A Review of Current Implant Design and Outcomes.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Radiological Changes in Adjacent and Index Levels after Cervical Disc Arthroplasty.Yonsei medical journal · 2022Article
- Posterior intraprosthetic dislocation of cervical arthroplasty: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2021Article
- Disc herniation and disc disease: the present and the future of management.International orthopaedics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is a powerful, motion-sparing treatment option for managing cervical radiculopathy or myelopathy. While CDA can be an excellent surgery for properly indicated patients, it is also less forgiving than cervical fusion. Optimally resolving patient symptoms while maintaining range of motion relies on near perfection in the surgical technique. Different CDA options exist on the market, with some having long-term proven success and others in early stages of clinical trials. We discuss the different options available for use, as well as strategies of positioning, approach, disc space preparation, implantation, and fusion prevention that we believe can help improve performance and outcomes of CDA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.