Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37028803›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2023

Cervical Disc Arthroplasty vs Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion at 10 Years: Results From a Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial at 3 Sites.

Pierce D Nunley, Michael Hisey, Micah Smith, Marcus B Stone

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Postoperative Physical Therapy for Cervical Total Disc Replacement: A Case Report.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2025
    Article
  8. Four-Level Cervical Disc Arthroplasty.International journal of spine surgery · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Pierce D NunleySpine Institute of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, USA pnunley@louisianaspine.org.
Michael HiseyTexas Back Institute, Plano, TX, USA.
Micah SmithOrthopaedics Northeast, Fort Wayne, IN, USA.
Marcus B StoneSpine Institute of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, USA.
Spine Institute of Louisiana · USNortheast Health · USTexas Back Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the past 20 years, multiple randomized controlled trials have shown cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) to be safe and effective for treating 1- and 2-level degenerative disc disease (DDD). The purpose of this postmarket study is to compare 10-year outcomes between CDA and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) from a randomized study at 3 centers.

methodsThis study was a continuation of a randomized, prospective, multicenter clinical trial comparing CDA with the Mobi-C cervical disc (Zimmer Biomet) vs ACDF. Following completion of the 7-year US Food and Drug Administration study, 10-year follow-up was obtained from consenting patients at 3 high-enrolling centers. The clinical and radiographic endpoints collected at 10 years included composite success, Neck Disability Index, neck and arm pain, short form-12, patient satisfaction, adjacent-segment pathology, major complications, and subsequent surgery.

resultsA total of 155 patients were enrolled (105 CDA; 50 ACDF). Follow-up was obtained from 78.1% of patients eligible after 7 years. At 10 years, CDA demonstrated superiority to ACDF. Composite success was 62.4% in CDA and 22.2% in ACDF (

conclusionsIn this postmarket study, CDA was superior to ACDF for treating symptomatic cervical DDD. CDA was statistically superior to ACDF for clinical success, subsequent surgery, and neurologic success. Results through 10 years demonstrate that CDA continues to be a safe and effective surgical alternative to fusion. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The results of this study support the long-term safety and effectiveness of cervical disc arthroplasty with the Mobi-C. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1:

Indexed as

adjacent-segment pathologyanterior cervical discectomy and fusioncervical disc arthroplastydegenerative disc diseaseMobi-C

Identifiers

PMID37028803
PMCPMC10165661
OpenAlexW4362700304

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.