Adjacent segment degeneration incidence uninfluenced by Total Disc Arthroplasty .
This report has been verified
by one or more authors of the
original publication.
Cette étude a été identifiée comme étant potentiellement à fort impact.
L'indicateur High Impact de l'ENP, basé sur l'IA, estime l'influence qu'un article est susceptible d'avoir en intégrant des signaux provenant à la fois de la revue dans laquelle il est publié et du contenu scientifique de l'article lui-même.
Développé à l'aide d'un traitement du langage naturel de pointe, le modèle High Impact de l'ENP prédit avec plus de précision les futures citations d'une étude que le seul facteur d'impact de la revue.
Cela permet d'identifier plus tôt les recherches cliniquement significatives et aide les lecteurs à se concentrer sur les articles les plus susceptibles d'influencer les pratiques futures.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2013;1(8):23 Spine Journal; 2010; 10; 1043-104893 patients, with mono or bi-level cervical disc symptomatic disease and upon failure of conservative treatment, were randomized to undergo total disc arthroplasty (TDA) or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Primary Outcome Measures were Visual Analogue Score (VAS), Neck Disability Index and Radiographic Assessment were made at different time points until 48 months. Both the ACDF and TDA procedures were found to be equivalent for rendering pain relief in both mono and bi level disc disease and had equivalent risks for inducing adjacent segment degeneration. Interestingly, it was observed that patients with concurrent degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine had greater likelihood of developing adjacent segment degeneration.
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
Oui = 1
Incertain = 0,5
Non pertinent = 0
Non = 0
L'évaluation des critères de rapport permet d'évaluer la transparence avec laquelle les auteurs rapportent les caractéristiques méthodologiques et les caractéristiques de l'essai dans la publication. L'évaluation est divisée en cinq catégories qui sont présentées ci-dessous.
3/4
Randomization
3/4
Outcome Measurements
1/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
4/4
Therapy Description
3/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
L'indice de fragilité est un outil qui aide à l'interprétation des résultats significatifs, en fournissant une mesure de la force d'un résultat. L'indice de fragilité représente le nombre d'événements consécutifs qui doivent être ajoutés à un résultat dichotomique pour que le résultat ne soit plus significatif. Un petit nombre représente un résultat plus faible et un grand nombre un résultat plus fort.
Pourquoi cette étude était-elle nécessaire maintenant ?
Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is an established treatment for the degenerative disc disease of the cervical spine; however, the development of implants and procedures to restore motion, segmental anatomy, and function shows success after further investigation. The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of adjacent segment disease in patients treated for degenerative disc disease with either total disc arthroplasty or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.
Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?
Is there a difference in incidence of adjacent segment disease after patients with degenerative disc disease are treated with either total disc arthroplasty or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion?
- The success rates were similar in procedures, 71% in TDA and 73.5% in ACDF, and median symptom-free survival period was 39.79+/-1.9 months for ACDF and 38.09+/- 1.9 months for TDA patients. Smokers had a trend towards worse survival rates (p=0.17) for both procedures.
- VAS and NDI scale were similar between groups (p-value = 0.693)
- No statistical difference was noted between groups in terms of development of adjacent lumbar disease (p-value = 0.885)
- Presence of documented lumbar disease was a statistically significant risk factor for development of adjacent lumbar disease (p-value = 0.016)
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?
Total disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion have the same clinical outcomes. However, lumbar disease increases the risk of adjacent cervical degenerative disc disease.
Comment cela affectera-t-il les soins prodigués à mes patients ?
This study suggests that both techniques are equivalent in treating degenerative disc disease and do not increase risk of adjacent lumbar disease compared to one another. The study also notes that lumbar disease is a significant risk factor for development of adjacent cervical degenerative disc disease. Therefore, it is recommended that physicians consider other factors before considering which treatment is most appropriate for patients.
AVIS DE NON-RESPONSABILITÉ
Le contenu de cette page est fourni à titre d'information uniquement et n'est pas destiné à remplacer un avis médical, un diagnostic ou un traitement professionnel. Si vous avez besoin d'un traitement médical, demandez toujours l'avis de votre médecin ou rendez-vous au service des urgences le plus proche. Les opinions, croyances et points de vue exprimés par les individus sur le contenu de cette page ne reflètent pas les opinions, croyances et points de vue d'OrthoEvidence.
0 de 4 articles mensuels GRATUITS débloqués
