ArticleNeurospine2021
Revision Surgeries at the Index Level After Cervical Disc Arthroplasty - A Systematic Review.
Article in Neurospine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Posterior cervical foraminotomy 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 · 2026Article
- Patient outcomes and surgical strategies in revision cervical arthroplasty following M6-C™ disc-related osteolysis.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 · 2025Article
- Reoperation Strategy for Failure of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty at Index and Adjacent Levels.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Safety and Feasibility of Intradiscal Administration of Matrilin-3-Primed Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stromal Cell Spheroids for Chronic Discogenic Low Back Pain: Phase 1 Clinical Trial.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Enhanced Intervertebral Disc Repair via Genetically Engineered Mesenchymal Stem Cells with Tetracycline Regulatory System.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Article
- Combining Virtual Surgical Planning and Patient-Specific 3D-Printing as a Solution to Complex Spinal Revision Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Cervical Radiculopathy: Focus on Factors for Better Surgical Outcomes and Operative Techniques.Asian spine journal · 2022Article
- The Effect of Subsidence on Segmental and Global Lordosis at Long-term Follow-up After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.Neurospine · 2022Article
- Anterior Cervical Foraminotomy for Radiculopathy After Cervical Artificial Disc Replacement: Technique Description and Case Report.International journal of spine surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo perform a systematic literature review on revision surgeries at the index level after cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) failure.
methodsA systematic literature review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Prospective studies on patients who required a secondary surgery after CDA failure were included for analysis. The minimum follow-up for these studies was 5 years.
resultsOut of 864 studies in the original search group, a total of 20 studies were included. From a total of 4,087 patients, 161 patients required a reoperation at the index level. A total of 170 surgeries were performed, as some patients required multiple surgeries. The most common secondary procedures were anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) (68%, N = 61) and posterior cervical fusion (15.5%, N = 14), followed by other reoperation (13.3%, N = 12). The associated outcomes for those who required a revision surgery were rarely mentioned in the included literature.
conclusionThe long-term revision rate at the index level of failed CDA surgery was 3.9%, with a minimum 5-year follow-up. ACDF was the most commonly performed procedure to salvage a failed CDA. Some patients who required a new surgery after CDA failure may require a more extensive salvage procedure and even subsequent surgeries.
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.