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

Similar clinical outcomes for total disc replacement and fusion treatments after 5 years

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
August 2013

Similar clinical outcomes for total disc replacement and fusion treatments after 5 years

Vol: 2| Issue: 7| Number:572| 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 Dec;17(6):493-501

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 either a ProDisc-L total disc replacement or circumferential fusion. The results of the study after 5 years found that total disc replacement was non-inferior to standard circumferential fusion, and demonstrated significantly better short-term improvements in some areas (ODI, SF-36 PCS). Both methods would be appropriate surgic...

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