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.
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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single-level cervical disc arthroplasty is associated with higher early subsequent surgery rates and similar adjacent segment disease rates compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Clinical outcome 24 months after cervical disc arthroplasty with a new articulating and viscoelastic disc prosthesis.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Anterior cervical decompression and fusion for Samartzis Type I Klippel-Feil syndrome complicated by cervical radiculopathy with radiographic spinal cord compression: a case report of sandwich-type interposed mobile segment.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Rates of Osteolysis for Commercially Available Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Devices in the United States: A Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database Analysis.International journal of spine surgery · 2025Article
- Review
- Comparative Analysis of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Trends, Demographics, and Clinical Outcomes in a Nationwide Inpatient Sample.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Postoperative Physical Therapy for Cervical Total Disc Replacement: A Case Report.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2025Article
- Four-Level Cervical Disc Arthroplasty.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Review
- Cervical Disc Arthroplasty for the Treatment of Noncontiguous Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease: Results of Mid- to Long-Term Follow-up.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Article
- A Systematic Review on Neurological Outcomes for Cervical Degenerative Myelopathy After Anterior Decompression Surgery: Motion Preservation vs Fusion.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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.