Literature DB >> 32279116

Complications of cervical total disc replacement and their associations with heterotopic ossification: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nicholas Hui1,2, Kevin Phan1,2, Hoi Man Kevin Cheng2, Yueh-Hsin Lin2, Ralph J Mobbs3,4,5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Although cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) is perceived as a safe procedure, no review to date has quantified the complication rates. Of note, heterotopic ossification (HO), one of the complications of CTDR, is hypothesised to cause adjacent segment degeneration (ASDegeneration). This association has not been proven in meta-analysis. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the pooled prevalence of complications following CTDR among studies that concomitantly reported the rate of HO, and the associations between HO and other complications, including ASDegeneration.
METHODS: Literatures search was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Complications were stratified into ≥ 1 and < 2 years, ≥ 2 and < 5 years, and ≥ 5 years follow-up. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Fifty-three studies were included, composed of 3223 patients in total. The pooled prevalence of post-operative complications following CTDR was low, ranging from 0.8% in vascular adverse events to 4.7% in dysphagia at short-term follow-up. The rate of ASDegeneration was significantly higher at long-term follow-up (pooled prevalence 36.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 22.8-49.1%) than that at mid-term follow-up (pooled prevalence 7.3%, 95% CI 2.8-11.8%). Multivariate meta-regression analysis demonstrated that ASDegeneration was independently and inversely correlated with age (p = 0.007) and positively correlated with HO (p = 0.010) at mid-term follow-up. At long-term follow-up, ASDegeneration was still positively correlated with HO (p = 0.011), but not age. Furthermore, dysphagia was inversely associated with HO (p = 0.016), after adjustment for age and length of follow-up.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, HO is associated with ASDegeneration and dysphagia.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adjacent segment degeneration; Cervical total disc replacement; Heterotopic ossification; Surgical complication

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32279116     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-020-06400-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  29 in total

1.  Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument.

Authors:  Karem Slim; Emile Nini; Damien Forestier; Fabrice Kwiatkowski; Yves Panis; Jacques Chipponi
Journal:  ANZ J Surg       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 1.872

2.  Range of motion change after cervical arthroplasty with ProDisc-C and prestige artificial discs compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Ung-Kyu Chang; Daniel H Kim; Max C Lee; Rafer Willenberg; Se-Hoon Kim; Jesse Lim
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2007-07

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

Authors:  O Richards; D Choi; J Timothy
Journal:  Br J Neurosurg       Date:  2011-08-04       Impact factor: 1.596

4.  Radiologically documented adjacent-segment degeneration after cervical arthroplasty: characteristics and review of cases.

Authors:  Seong Yi; Dong Yeob Lee; Poong Gee Ahn; Keung Nyun Kim; Do Heum Yoon; Hyun Chul Shin
Journal:  Surg Neurol       Date:  2009-08-07

Review 5.  Systematic review and meta-analysis: techniques and a guide for the academic surgeon.

Authors:  Kevin Phan; David H Tian; Christopher Cao; Deborah Black; Tristan D Yan
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2015-03

Review 6.  Adjacent segment degeneration and disease following cervical arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michael F Shriver; Daniel Lubelski; Akshay M Sharma; Michael P Steinmetz; Edward C Benzel; Thomas E Mroz
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 4.166

Review 7.  Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in spine surgery, neurosurgery and orthopedics: guidelines for the surgeon scientist.

Authors:  Kevin Phan; Ralph J Mobbs
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-12

Review 8.  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus cervical arthroplasty for the management of cervical spondylosis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhuo Ma; Xun Ma; Huilin Yang; Xiaoming Guan; Xiang Li
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-10-22       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement.

Authors:  David Moher; Larissa Shamseer; Mike Clarke; Davina Ghersi; Alessandro Liberati; Mark Petticrew; Paul Shekelle; Lesley A Stewart
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2015-01-01

Review 10.  Safety and efficacy of cervical disc arthroplasty in preventing the adjacent segment disease: a meta-analysis of mid- to long-term outcomes in prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter studies.

Authors:  Dariusz Latka; Klaudia Kozlowska; Grzegorz Miekisiak; Kajetan Latka; Jacek Chowaniec; Tomasz Olbrycht; Miroslaw Latka
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2019-03-28       Impact factor: 2.423

View more
  3 in total

1.  Letter to the Editor concerning "Complications of cervical total disc replacement and their associations with heterotopic ossification: a systematic review and meta-analysis" by N. Hui, et al. [Eur Spine J; 2020; 29(11):2688-2700].

Authors:  Yi-Wei Shen; Hao Liu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Impact of heterotopic ossification following lumbar total disk replacement: a systematic review.

Authors:  Colleen Hood; Reza Zamani; Mohammad Akrami
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-04-23       Impact factor: 2.562

3.  Catastrophic delayed cervical arthroplasty failure: illustrative case.

Authors:  Diego A Carrera; Christian B Ricks
Journal:  J Neurosurg Case Lessons       Date:  2022-03-14
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.