ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2019
One-Level Versus 2-Level Treatment With Cervical Disc Arthroplasty or Fusion: Outcomes Up to 7 Years.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Pivotal Clinical Trial of the Artificial Cervical Disc-LP at Two Levels for Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease
Investigation of the PRESTIGE® Cervical Disc Device at a Single Level for Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease
A Prospective, Multicenter, Controlled Clinical Trial of an Artificial Cervical Disc LP at a Single Level for Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of anterior surgical decompression surgery for cervical degenerative disk disease: a systematic review of economic evaluations.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 · 2022Pooled it
- Postoperative outcomes of multilevel versus single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in patients with sarcopenia: a matched cohort study.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- The Impact of Obesity on Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Two-Level Cervical Disc Replacement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Postoperative Physical Therapy for Cervical Total Disc Replacement: A Case Report.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2025Article
- Minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical fusion and arthroplasty: Systematic review and updated meta-analysis.Brain & spine · 2024Review
- Article
- Article
- Impact of Depression Severity on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Following Multilevel Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.International journal of spine surgery · 2022Article
- Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA)/total disc replacement (TDR) vs. anterior cervical diskectomy/fusion (ACDF): A review.Surgical neurology international · 2022Review
- Radiological and Clinical Outcomes after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) with an Innovative 3D Printed Cellular Titanium Cage Filled with Vertebral Bone Marrow.BioMed research international · 2022Article
- Late complication of cervical disc arthroplasty: heterotopic ossification causing myelopathy after 10 years. Illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2021Article
- A systematic review of risk factors and adverse outcomes associated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery over the past decade.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) have been used to treat degenerative disc disease at single as well as multiple cervical levels. This study compares the safety and efficacy of 1-level versus 2-level CDA and ACDF.
methodsIn total, 545 and 397 patients with degenerative disc disease were studied in 1-level and 2-level Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved clinical trials, respectively: CDA (n = 280 and 209), ACDF (n = 265 and 188). Data from these studies were used to compare 1- versus 2-level procedures: the propensity score method was used to adjust for potential confounding effects, and adjusted mean outcome safety and efficacy scores at 2 and 7 years postsurgery were compared between 1-level and 2-level procedures within treatment type.
resultsOne-level and 2-level procedures had similar rates of improvement in overall success and patient-reported outcomes scores for both CDA and ACDF. There were no statistical differences in rates of implant-related adverse events (AEs) or serious implant-related AEs between 1-level and 2-level CDA. The 7-year rate of implant-related AEs was higher for 2-level than 1-level ACDF (27.7% vs 18.9%,
conclusionsOne- and 2-level CDA appear equally safe and effective in the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease. Two-level ACDF appears to be as effective as 1-level ACDF but with a higher rate of some AEs at long-term follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2. CLINICAL TRIALS: clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00667459, NCT00642876, and NCT00637156.
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.