The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00586-016-4922-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Ø. P. Nygaard and J.-A. Zwart contributed equally.
Standard surgical treatment for symptomatic cervical disc disease has been discectomy and fusion, but the use of arthroplasty, designed to preserve motion, has increased, and most studies report clinical outcome in its favor. Few of these trials, however, blinded the patients. We, therefore, conducted the Norwegian Cervical Arthroplasty Trial, and present 2-year clinical outcome after arthroplasty or fusion.
This multicenter trial included 136 patients with single-level cervical disc disease. The patients were randomized to arthroplasty or fusion, and blinded to the treatment modality. The surgical team was blinded to randomization until nerve root decompression was completed. Primary outcome was the self-rated Neck Disability Index. Secondary outcomes were the numeric rating scale for pain and quality of life questionnaires Short Form-36 and EuroQol-5Dimension-3 Level.
There was a significant improvement in the primary and all secondary outcomes from baseline to 2-year follow-up for both arthroplasty and fusion (P < 0.001), and no observed significant between-group differences at any follow-up times. However, linear mixed model analyses, correcting for baseline values, dropouts and missing data, revealed a difference in Neck Disability Index (P = 0.049), and arm pain (P = 0.027) in favor of fusion at 2 years. The duration of surgery was longer (P < 0.001), and the frequency of reoperations higher (P = 0.029) with arthroplasty.
The present study showed excellent clinical results and no significant difference between treatments at any scheduled follow-up. However, the rate of index level reoperations was higher and the duration of surgery longer with arthroplasty.
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT 00735176.19.
Supplementary material 1 (TIFF 869 kb)586_2016_4922_MOESM1_ESM.tif
Supplementary material 2 (TIFF 3184 kb)586_2016_4922_MOESM2_ESM.tif
Supplementary material 3 (TIFF 3184 kb)586_2016_4922_MOESM3_ESM.tif
Supplementary material 4 (TIFF 3184 kb)586_2016_4922_MOESM4_ESM.tif
Supplementary material 5 (TIFF 3184 kb)586_2016_4922_MOESM5_ESM.tif
Supplementary material 6 (TIFF 3184 kb)586_2016_4922_MOESM6_ESM.tif
Supplementary material 7 (DOCX 14 kb)586_2016_4922_MOESM7_ESM.docx
Supplementary material 8 (DOCX 14 kb)586_2016_4922_MOESM8_ESM.docx
Bogduk N (2003) The anatomy and pathophysiology of neck pain. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 14:455–472 (v. Review)
Lee CH, Hyun SJ, Kim MJ, Yeom JS, Kim WH, Kim KJ, Jahng TA, Kim HJ, Yoon SH (2013) Comparative analysis of 3 different construct systems for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: stand-alone cage, iliac graft plus plate augmentation, and cage plus plating. J Spinal Disord Tech 26:112–118 CrossRefPubMed
Hilibrand AS, Robbins M (2004) Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion. Spine J 4:190–194 CrossRef
Heller JG, Sasso RC, Papadopoulos SM, Anderson PA, Fessler RG, Hacker RJ, Coric D, Cauthen JC, Riew DK (2009) Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Spine 34:101–107 CrossRefPubMed
Phillips FM, Lee JY, Geisler FH, Cappuccino A, Chaput CD, DeVine JG, Reah C, Gilder KM, Howell KM, McAfee PC (2013) A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical investigation comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. 2-year results from the US FDA IDE clinical trial. Spine 38:E907–E918 CrossRefPubMed
Rozankovic M, Marasanov SM, Vukic M (2016) Cervical disc replacement with discover versus fusion in a single level cervical disc disease: a prospective single center randomized trial with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Clin Spine Surg. 2016 Jun 9 [Epub ahead of print]
Luo J, Huang S, Gong M, Dai X, Gao M, Yu T, Zhou Z, Zou X (2015) Comparison of artificial cervical arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for one-level cervical degenerative disc disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25(Suppl 1):S115–S125 CrossRefPubMed
Hu Y, Lv G, Ren S, Johansen D (2016) Mid- to Long-Term Outcomes of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Treatment of Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Eight Prospective Randomized Controlled Trials. PLoS One 11:e0149312 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Vernon H, Mior S (1991) The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 14:409–415 PubMed
Brooks RG, Jendteg S, Lindgren B, Persson U, Bjork S (1991) EuroQol: health-related quality of life measurement. Results of the Swedish questionnaire exercise. Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 18:37–48
EuroQol Group EuroQol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 16:199–208
Pool JJ, Ostelo RW, Hoving JL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. (2007) Minimal clinically important change of the Neck Disability Index and the Numerical Rating Scale for patients with neck pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:3047–3051
Puttlitz CM, DiAngelo DJ (2005) Cervical spine arthroplasty biomechanics. Neurosurg Clin North Am 16:589–594 CrossRef
Nemoto O, Kitada A, Naitou S, Tachibana A, Ito Y, Fujikawa A (2015) Stand-alone anchored cage versus cage with plating for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; a prospective, randomized, controlled study with a 2-year follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25:127–134 CrossRef
Gornet MF, Burkus JK, Shaffrey ME, Nian H, Harrell FE Jr (2016) Cervical disc arthroplasty with prestige LP disc versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Seven-year outcomes. Int J Spine Surg 22(10):24
Cou S, Gao J, Xu B, Lu X, Han Y, Meng H (2016) Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) versus cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) for two contiguous levels cervical disc degenerative disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Spine J 17 [Epub ahead of print]
Patil PG, Turner DA, Pietrobon R (2005) National trends in surgical procedures for degenerative cervical spine disease: 1990–2000. Neurosurgery 57:753–758 (discussion 753–758)
Sundseth J, Jacobsen EA, Kolstad F, Sletteberg RO, Nygaard OP, Johnsen LG, Pripp AH, Andresen H, Fredriksli OA, Myrseth E, Zwart JA (2016) Heterotopic ossification and clinical outcome in nonconstrained cervical arthroplasty 2 years after surgery: the Norwegian Cervical Arthroplasty Trial (NORCAT). Eur Spine J 25:2271–2278 CrossRefPubMed
- The Norwegian Cervical Arthroplasty Trial (NORCAT): 2-year clinical outcome after single-level cervical arthroplasty versus fusion—a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, controlled multicenter study
Oddrun Anita Fredriksli
Lars Gunnar Johnsen
Are Hugo Pripp
Øystein P. Nygaard
On behalf of the NORCAT study group
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie
Mail Icon II