Whether to perform hybrid surgery (HS) in contrast to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) when treating patients with multilevel cervical disc degeneration remains a controversial subject. To resolve this we have undertaken a meta-analysis comparing the outcomes from HS with ACDF in this condition. Seven databases were searched for studies of HS and ACDF from inception of the study to 1 September 2019. Both random-effects and fixed-effects models were used to evaluate the overall effect of the C2-C7 range of motion (ROM), ROM of superior/inferior adjacent levels, adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), heterotopic ossification (HO), complications, neck disability index (NDI) score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Odom’s criteria, blood loss, and operating and hospitalization time. To obtain more credible results contour-enhanced funnel plots, Egger’s and Begg’s tests, meta-regression, and sensitivity analyses were performed.Aims
Methods
Aims. The aim of this study was to determine how the short- and medium-
to long-term outcome measures after total disc replacement (TDR)
compare with those of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF),
using a systematic review and meta-analysis. Patients and Methods. Databases including Medline, Embase, and Scopus were searched.
Inclusion criteria involved prospective randomized control trials
(RCTs) reporting the surgical treatment of patients with symptomatic
degenerative cervical disc disease. Two independent investigators
extracted the data. The strength of evidence was assessed using
the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation
(GRADE) criteria. The primary outcome measures were overall and
neurological success, and these were included in the meta-analysis. Standardized
patient-reported outcomes, including the incidence of further surgery
and adjacent segment disease, were summarized and discussed. Results. A total of 22 papers published from 14 RCTs were included, representing
3160 patients with follow-up of up to ten years. Meta-analysis indicated
that TDR is superior to ACDF at two years and between four and seven
years. In the short-term, patients who underwent TDR had better
patient-reported outcomes than those who underwent ACDF, but at
two years this was typically not significant. Results between four
and seven years showed significant differences in Neck Disability
Index (NDI), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component
scores,
