Impact of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty vs Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion on Driving Disability: Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial With 10-Year Follow-Up

被引:5
|
作者
Jain, Deeptee [1 ]
Kelly, Michael P. [1 ]
Gornet, Matthew F. [2 ]
Burkus, J. Kenneth [3 ]
Hodges, Scott D. [4 ]
Dryer, Randall F. [5 ]
McConnell, Jeffrey R. [6 ]
Lanman, Todd H. [7 ]
Riew, K. Daniel [8 ]
机构
[1] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Dept Orthopaed Surg, 660 South Euclid Ave,Campus Box 8233, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
[2] Orthoped Ctr St Louis, St Louis, MO 63017 USA
[3] Wilderness Spine Serv, Columbus, GA USA
[4] Ctr Sports Med & Orthopaed, Chattanooga, TN USA
[5] Cent Texas Spine Inst, Austin, TX USA
[6] OAA Orthoped Specialists, Allentown, PA USA
[7] Cedars Sinai Med Ctr, Inst Spinal Disorders, Los Angeles, CA 90048 USA
[8] Columbia Univ, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Med Ctr, New York, NY USA
来源
关键词
driving disability; cervical disc arthroplasty; anterior cervical discectomy; fusion; MOTION;
D O I
10.14444/8199
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Driving an automobile requires the ability to turn the neck laterally. Anecdotally, patients with multilevel fusions often complain about restricted turning motion. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) on (hiving disability improvement at 10-year follow-up after a 2-level procedure. Methods: In the original randomized controlled trial, patients with cervical radiculopathy or myelopathy at 2 levels underwent CDA or ACDF. The driving disability question from the Neck Disability Index was rated from 0 to 5 years preoperatively and up to 10 years postoperatively. Severity of (hiving disability was categorized into "none" (score 0), "mild" (1 or 2). and "severe" (3, 4. or 5). Score and severity were compared between groups. Results: Out of 397 patients. 148 CDA and 118 ACDF patients had 10-year follow-up. Driving disability scores were not different between the groups preoperatively (CDA: 2.65; ACDF: 2.71, P = 0.699). Postoperatively, the scores in the CDA group were significantly lower than those in the ACDF group at 5 (0.60 vs 1.08, P <= 0.001) and 10 years (0.66 vs 1.07. P = 0.001). Mean score improvement in the CDA group was significantly greater than the ACDF group at 10-year follow-up (-1.94 vs -1.63, P = 0.003). The majority of patients reported severe driving disability (CDA: 56.9%, ACDF: 58.0%. P = 0.968) before surgery. After surgery, a greater proportion of patients in the CDA group had neck pain-free driving compared with the ACDF group at 5 (63.3% vs 41.8%. P < 0.001) and 10 years (61.8% vs 41.2%, P = 0.003). Conclusion: In patients with cervical radiculopathy/myelopathy and 2-level disease, CDA provided greater improvements in driving disability as compared with ACDF at 10-year follow-up. This is the first report of its kind. This finding may be attributable to preservation of motion associated with CDA.
引用
收藏
页码:95 / 101
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of adverse events between cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a 10-year follow-up
    Loidolt, Travis
    Kurra, Swamy
    Riew, K. Daniel
    Levi, Allan D.
    Florman, Jeffrey
    Lavelle, William F.
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2021, 21 (02): : 253 - 264
  • [2] Comparison of clinical outcomes between cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of single-level cervical spondylosis: a 10-year follow-up study
    Qi, Min
    Xu, Chen
    Liu, Yang
    Cao, Peng
    Wang, Xinwei
    Chen, Huajiang
    Yuan, Wen
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2023, 23 (03): : 361 - 368
  • [3] Cost-utility analysis modeling at 2-year follow-up for cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A single-center contribution to the randomized controlled trial
    Warren, Daniel
    Andres, Tate
    Hoelscher, Christian
    Ricart-Hoffiz, Pedro
    Bendo, John
    Goldstein, Jeffrey
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPINE SURGERY, 2013, 7 : e58 - e66
  • [4] Clinical and radiological analysis of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty: eight-year follow-up results compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion
    Lei, Tao
    Liu, Yaming
    Wang, Hui
    Xu, Jiaxin
    Ma, Qinghua
    Wang, Linfeng
    Shen, Yong
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2016, 40 (06) : 1197 - 1203
  • [5] Clinical and radiological analysis of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty: eight-year follow-up results compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion
    Tao Lei
    Yaming Liu
    Hui Wang
    Jiaxin Xu
    Qinghua Ma
    Linfeng Wang
    Yong Shen
    International Orthopaedics, 2016, 40 : 1197 - 1203
  • [6] Sagittal Cervical Alignment After Cervical Disc Arthroplasty and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Results of a Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial
    Anakwenze, Okechukwu A.
    Auerbach, Joshua D.
    Milby, Andrew H.
    Lonner, Baron S.
    Balderston, Richard A.
    SPINE, 2009, 34 (19) : 2001 - 2007
  • [7] Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery versus total disc replacement: A comparative study with minimum of 10-year follow-up
    Yang, Si-Dong
    Zhu, Yan-Bo
    Yan, Suo-Zhou
    Di, Jun
    Yang, Da-Long
    Ding, Wen-Yuan
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2017, 7
  • [8] Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery versus total disc replacement: A comparative study with minimum of 10-year follow-up
    Si-Dong Yang
    Yan-Bo Zhu
    Suo-Zhou Yan
    Jun Di
    Da-Long Yang
    Wen-Yuan Ding
    Scientific Reports, 7
  • [9] Two-Level Cervical Disc Arthroplasty vs. Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: 10 Year Outcomes of a Prospective, Randomized IDE Clinical Trial
    Lanman, Todd Hopkins
    Gornet, Matthew
    Dryer, Randall
    Burkus, J. Kenneth
    Hodges, Scott
    McConnell, Jeffrey
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2019, 131 (01)
  • [10] Application of Cervical Arthroplasty With Bryan Cervical Disc 10-Year Follow-up Results in China
    Zhao, Yanbin
    Zhang, Yilong
    Sun, Yu
    Pan, Shengfa
    Zhou, Feifei
    Liu, Zhongjun
    SPINE, 2016, 41 (02) : 111 - 115