To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Lumbar total disc replacement and fusion provide similar clinical outcomes at 5 years

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
June 2015

Lumbar total disc replacement and fusion provide similar clinical outcomes at 5 years

Vol: 4| Issue: 6| Number:17| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Five-year results of the prospective, randomized, multicenter, Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement versus circumferential arthrodesis for the treatment of single-level degenerative di

J Neurosurg Spine. 2012 Oct 19

Contributing Authors:
JE Zigler RB Delamarter

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

236 patients with degenerative disc disease were randomized to receive the ProDisc-L total disc replacement or circumferential fusion. The results of the 5 year study indicate that total disc replacement is non-inferior to fusion and results in significantly better short-term outcomes for some measures including satisfaction. Both fusion and total disc replacement are reasonable long-term surgical...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue