This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
Greater improvement, lower reoperation rate seen with cervical total disc placement vs ACDF
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
Results from this 5-year study indicated significant improvements in outcomes and a lower reoperation rate with the use of a two-level cervical disc replacement compared with the use of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for patients with two-level cervical spondylosis.
In this FDA investigational device exemption study, researchers prospectively randomized 225 patients to receive the Mobi-C (LDR Medical) cervical total disc replacement device and 105 patients to receive anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Investigators evaluated the patients’ outcomes, including adverse events, incidence of reoperation, Neck Disability Index (NDI), VAS scores and SF-12 scores, for up to 60 months.
Results showed the follow-up rates at 60 months for the cervical total disc replacement and ACDF groups were 90.7% and 86.7%, respectively. Investigators noted all outcome scores from the baseline to all time points had significantly improved in both groups, with patients treated with the cervical disc replacement showing significantly greater improvements at 60 months for the NDI, SF-12 physical component summary score and overall satisfaction with treatment compared with the ACDF group. Patients in the cervical disc replacement group had a significantly lower reoperation rate compared with patients who received ACDF. Groups were not significantly different with regard to the rate of adverse events. ‒ by Monica Jaramillo
Disclosures: Radcliff reports he is an unpaid consultant for 4WebMedical; is paid consultant for Altus Spine; is a paid consultant, receives research a support from and is an unpaid consultant for DePuy, a Johnson & Johnson Company; receives intellectual property royalties, is a paid consultant for and receives research support from Globus Medical; is an unpaid consultant for LDR; is a paid consultant for and receives research support from Medtronic; receives other financial or material support from Nexxt Spine and NuVasive; is a paid consultant for Orthofix Inc.; receives IP royalties from and is a paid consultant for Orthopedic Sciences Inc.; receives research support from Pacira Pharmaceuticals and Paradigm Spine; and receives other financial or material support from Stryker. Please see the full study for a list of all other authors’ relevant financial disclosures.
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts