ArticleNeurospine2023
Clinical Effectiveness of Artificial Disc Replacement in Comparison With Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in the Patients With Cervical Myelopathy: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in Neurospine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cervical disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using stand-alone cage for degenerative cervical spondylosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Fusion Assessment, Reoperation Rates, and Imaging Modality Agreement after Four-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Retrospective Single-Center Study.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- ACDF and cervical disc replacement for single-level cervical spine degenerative disease: a frailty driven propensity score-matched comparative analysis.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
- Recent progress in surgical treatment of cervical spine myelopathy - A narrative review.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025Article
- Radiographic Characteristics of Caudal Segment in Multilevel Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: The Bony Buttress Formation.Neurospine · 2024Article
- Does the novel artificial cervical joint complex resolve the conflict between stability and mobility after anterior cervical surgery? a finite element study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCervical myelopathy (CM) describes the compressive cervical spinal cord state, often accompanied by serious clinical condition, by herniated disc or hypertrophied spurs or ligament. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been frequently employed as conventional surgical solution for this CM despite its inherent biomechanical handicap. Alternatively, an artificial disc replacement (ADR) preserves cervical motion while still decompressing the spinal canal and neural foramen. This analysis elaborated to clarify the potential benefits of ADR application to CM over ACDF from the conglomerated results of the past references.
methodsA literature search was performed using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane review, and KMbase databases from the studies published until March 2023. Six studies (3 randomized controlled study [RCTs] and 3 non-RCTs) were included in a qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Data were extracted and analyzed using a random effects model to obtain effect size and its statistical significance. Quality assessment and evidence level were established in accordance with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology.
resultsAmong 6 studies, 2 studies showed that ADR group achieved significantly better clinical improvement than the ACDF group, while the rest 4 studies revealed no significant difference. A meta-analysis showed better clinical outcomes with or without statistical significance. The level of evidence was low because of inconsistency and imprecision.
conclusionADR was superior or at least, not inferior to ACDF in terms of functional recovery. However, its application to the CM patients is merely empowered with weak strength due to low level of evidence.
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.