Efficacy of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Cervical Disc Arthroplasty in the Treatment of Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease, Radiculopathy, and Myelopathy: A Systematic Review.
{"title":"Efficacy of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Cervical Disc Arthroplasty in the Treatment of Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease, Radiculopathy, and Myelopathy: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Fakhri Awawdeh, Ali Salam, Varun Soti","doi":"10.7759/cureus.74418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD) is a condition in which the discs in the neck deteriorate, causing symptoms including neck and arm pain, muscle weakness, and incoordination. In severe cases, it can lead to nerve and spinal cord compression, resulting in radiculopathy and myelopathy. This review aimed to assess the effectiveness of two surgical treatments, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA), for addressing cervical DDD, radiculopathy, and myelopathy. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a literature search was conducted in the PubMed and BioMed Central databases, from January to March 2024. Thirty-one studies were included, comparing the outcomes of ACDF and CDA in patients with cervical DDD, radiculopathy, and myelopathy. Data were analyzed to evaluate outcomes such as the Neck Disability Index (NDI), pain levels, neurological status, incidence of secondary surgeries, range of motion (ROM) maintenance, and occurrence of adjacent segment disease. CDA demonstrated comparable or superior clinical success to ACDF. Both the techniques showed similar improvements in NDI, pain levels, and neurological status during medium- and long-term follow-ups. CDA had lower rates of secondary surgeries and adverse events related to surgery or implants compared to ACDF. It also demonstrated a lower incidence of adjacent segment disease and better ROM preservation. The evidence supports CDA as a safe and effective alternative to ACDF for patients with cervical DDD, particularly those who may benefit from motion preservation. However, further long-term, multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to provide more definitive guidance for clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":93960,"journal":{"name":"Cureus","volume":"16 11","pages":"e74418"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11590168/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cureus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.74418","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD) is a condition in which the discs in the neck deteriorate, causing symptoms including neck and arm pain, muscle weakness, and incoordination. In severe cases, it can lead to nerve and spinal cord compression, resulting in radiculopathy and myelopathy. This review aimed to assess the effectiveness of two surgical treatments, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA), for addressing cervical DDD, radiculopathy, and myelopathy. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a literature search was conducted in the PubMed and BioMed Central databases, from January to March 2024. Thirty-one studies were included, comparing the outcomes of ACDF and CDA in patients with cervical DDD, radiculopathy, and myelopathy. Data were analyzed to evaluate outcomes such as the Neck Disability Index (NDI), pain levels, neurological status, incidence of secondary surgeries, range of motion (ROM) maintenance, and occurrence of adjacent segment disease. CDA demonstrated comparable or superior clinical success to ACDF. Both the techniques showed similar improvements in NDI, pain levels, and neurological status during medium- and long-term follow-ups. CDA had lower rates of secondary surgeries and adverse events related to surgery or implants compared to ACDF. It also demonstrated a lower incidence of adjacent segment disease and better ROM preservation. The evidence supports CDA as a safe and effective alternative to ACDF for patients with cervical DDD, particularly those who may benefit from motion preservation. However, further long-term, multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to provide more definitive guidance for clinical practice.