Cervical arthroplasty: the beginning, the middle, the end?

Cervical arthroplasty has developed as an alternative to spinal fusion for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. The popularity of artificial discs has grown as the evidence of complications following arthrodesis has increased, making the theoretical advantages (motion preservation, altering the natural history of disease, prevention of adjacent segment disease) of disc replacement more attractive. However, as more discs are implanted and the length of follow-up increases, reported complications such as heterotopic ossification, device migration and spontaneous fusion of arthroplasty devices are growing. As a result, surgeons and patients face a challenge when deciding between motion-preserving or fusion surgery. Currently, there is inadequate evidence to promote extensive use of artificial discs for cervical spondylosis, despite promising short-term and intermediate clinical outcomes. However, there is also insufficient evidence to cease using them completely. The use of arthroplasty over fusion in the long term can only be justified if the incidence of adjacent segment disease decreases as a result. Despite the level of investment and research into arthroplasty outcomes, long-term follow-up has yet to be completed and has not convincingly demonstrated the effect of artificial discs on adjacent segment disease. Further long-term randomised trials are necessary to determine whether cervical arthroplasty is able to reduce the incidence of adjacent segment disease and, in doing so, replace arthrodesis as the gold standard treatment for cervical spondylosis.