Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30585142›Full record

SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2018

Mid- to long-term results of total disc replacement for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a systematic review.

Xu-Dong Cui, Hai-Tao Li, Wen Zhang, Lin-Lin Zhang, Zong-Ping Luo, Hui-Lin Yang

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06989632 (Total Lumbar Disc Prosthesis and Subsequent Work Activity 5 Years After Total Lumbar Disc Replacement), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06989632 completednot on this map

Total Lumbar Disc Prosthesis and Subsequent Work Activity 5 Years After Total Lumbar Disc Replacement

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of ValenciaRan2008 to 2025Enrolled130ConditionsLumbar Disc Degeneration, Lumbar Disc Disease, Sciatica, Lumbar Disc HerniationArmsTotal lumbar disc prosthesis (Baguera®L, Spineart, Switzerland)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [Long-Term Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Maverick].Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca · 2026
    Observational
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Future of Arthroplasty in the Spine.International journal of spine surgery · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Revision surgery of spinal dynamic implants: a literature review and algorithm proposal.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
    Review
  17. Artificial disc replacement in spine surgery.Annals of translational medicine · 2019
    Review
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.

Xu-Dong CuiOrthopedic Institute, Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu, China.
Hai-Tao LiOrthopedic Institute, Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu, China.
Wen ZhangOrthopedic Institute, Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu, China.
Lin-Lin ZhangOrthopedic Institute, Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu, China.
Zong-Ping LuoOrthopedic Institute, Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu, China. zongping_luo@yahoo.com.
Hui-Lin YangOrthopedic Institute, Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu, China. 641137852@qq.com.

Funding

the National Natural Science Foundation of China 81320108018, 31570943 and 31270995
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLumbar total disc replacement (TDR) has shown satisfactory clinical outcomes with few complications and reoperations at short-term follow-up, but the mid- to long-term results are not clear. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the mid- to long-term clinical outcomes of artificial TDR for lumbar degenerative disc diseases. PATIENTS AND

methodsA systematic search was conducted using the PubMed database to identify studies of TDR surgery that included at least 3 years of follow-up. The search keywords were as follows: lumbar, total disc replacement, and arthroplasty. The following data were extracted: patient demographics, visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, satisfactory rate, clinical success rate, complications, and reoperations.

resultsThirteen studies, including eight prospective studies and five retrospective studies, met the criteria. A total of 946 patients were identified who reported at least 3 years of follow-up results. The artificial prostheses in these studies were ProDisc-L, Charité, AcroFlex, Maverick, and XL TDR. Patients with lumbar TDR demonstrated significant improvements in VAS scores of 51.1 to 70.5% and of - 15.6 to - 44.4 for Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores at the last follow-up. Patient satisfaction rates were reported in eight studies and ranged from 75.5 to 93.3%. Complication rates were reported in 11 studies, ranging from 0 to 34.4%. The overall reoperation rate was 12.1% (119/986), ranging from 0 to 39.3%, with eight of the 13 studies reporting a reoperation rate of less than 10%.

conclusionsThis review shows that lumbar TDR effectively results in pain relief and an improvement in quality of life at mid- to long-term follow-up. Complication and reoperation rates were acceptable. However, this study did not provide sufficient evidence to show that lumbar TDR is superior to fusion surgery. To answer that question, a greater number of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed.

Indexed as

HumansIntervertebral Disc DegenerationLow Back PainLumbar VertebraePatient SatisfactionQuality of LifeReoperationTotal Disc ReplacementLumbar total disc replacementMid- to long-term follow-upSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30585142
PMCPMC6306000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.