Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion without plate (ACDFWP) versus anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA) for cervical spondylosis: A meta-analysis and literature review.

IF 1.1 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Jiajie Peng, Sihan Li, Xiangying Lin, Degui Zhong, Rong Zheng, Minghan Huang, Pengfei Li, Hongmei Song, Tetsuya Asakawa
{"title":"Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion without plate (ACDFWP) versus anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA) for cervical spondylosis: A meta-analysis and literature review.","authors":"Jiajie Peng,&nbsp;Sihan Li,&nbsp;Xiangying Lin,&nbsp;Degui Zhong,&nbsp;Rong Zheng,&nbsp;Minghan Huang,&nbsp;Pengfei Li,&nbsp;Hongmei Song,&nbsp;Tetsuya Asakawa","doi":"10.5582/irdr.2022.01080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This meta-analysis compared the clinical outcomes between two alternative surgeries for patients with cervical spondylosis, namely anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) without plate (ACDFWP) vs. anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA). We searched databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Web of Science (firstly available-2019). A standard meta-analysis was performed with the included studies. A Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used for the evaluation of the study quality of nonrandomized-controlled trials (nRCTs), while a Risk of Bias (RoB) battery was used for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Eight studies involving 640 patients were included. No significant difference was found in the indices of Neck Disability Index (NDI) score, Visual Analog Score (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, operative time, blood loss, Swallowing Quality of Life Score (SWAL-QL), and complications. Cervical alignment was significantly better in the ACDFWP than in ACDA (mean difference (MD) = -0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-1.11, -0.23], <i>P</i> = 0.003, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 20%). Although the alternative ACDFWP was slightly superior in terms of the index of cervical alignment, the limited research on this subject present insufficient evidence. Further well-designed studies are warranted in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":14420,"journal":{"name":"Intractable & rare diseases research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9437997/pdf/irdr-11-105.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intractable & rare diseases research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5582/irdr.2022.01080","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This meta-analysis compared the clinical outcomes between two alternative surgeries for patients with cervical spondylosis, namely anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) without plate (ACDFWP) vs. anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA). We searched databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Web of Science (firstly available-2019). A standard meta-analysis was performed with the included studies. A Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used for the evaluation of the study quality of nonrandomized-controlled trials (nRCTs), while a Risk of Bias (RoB) battery was used for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Eight studies involving 640 patients were included. No significant difference was found in the indices of Neck Disability Index (NDI) score, Visual Analog Score (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, operative time, blood loss, Swallowing Quality of Life Score (SWAL-QL), and complications. Cervical alignment was significantly better in the ACDFWP than in ACDA (mean difference (MD) = -0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-1.11, -0.23], P = 0.003, I 2 = 20%). Although the alternative ACDFWP was slightly superior in terms of the index of cervical alignment, the limited research on this subject present insufficient evidence. Further well-designed studies are warranted in the future.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

颈椎病的前路颈椎间盘切除术和无钢板融合(ACDFWP)与前路颈椎间盘置换术(ACDA):荟萃分析和文献回顾。
本荟萃分析比较了颈椎病患者的两种替代手术的临床结果,即前路颈椎间盘切除术和融合(ACDF)无钢板(ACDFWP)与前路颈椎间盘置换术(ACDA)。我们检索了PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane Library、Google Scholar和Web of Science(2019年首次可用)等数据库。对纳入的研究进行标准荟萃分析。评价非随机对照试验(nRCTs)的研究质量采用ROBINS-I工具,评价随机对照试验(rct)的研究质量采用robs工具。纳入了涉及640例患者的8项研究。两组患者的颈部残疾指数(NDI)评分、视觉模拟评分(VAS)、日本骨科协会(JOA)评分、手术时间、出血量、吞咽生活质量评分(sval - ql)、并发症等指标均无显著差异。ACDFWP组的颈椎对正性明显优于ACDA组(平均差值(MD) = -0.67, 95%可信区间(CI) [-1.11, -0.23], P = 0.003, i2 = 20%)。虽然替代ACDFWP在颈椎对正指数方面略优于ACDFWP,但有限的研究表明证据不足。未来需要进一步精心设计的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Intractable & rare diseases research
Intractable & rare diseases research MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信