{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,11,3]],"date-time":"2026-11-03T11:15:07Z","timestamp":1793704507794,"version":"4.5.1"},"reference-count":62,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"11","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2019,10,22]],"date-time":"2019-10-22T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1571702400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2019,10,22]],"date-time":"2019-10-22T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1571702400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Eur Spine J"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2020,11]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>Meta-analyses on the comparison between fusion and prosthesis in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy mainly analyse studies including mixed patient populations: patients with radiculopathy with and without myelopathy. The outcome for patients with myelopathy is different compared to those without. Furthermore, apart from decompression of the spinal cord, restriction of motion is one of the cornerstones of the surgical treatment of spondylotic myelopathy. From this point of view, the results for arthroplasty might be suboptimal for this category of patients. Comparing clinical outcome in patients exclusively suffering from radiculopathy is therefore a more valid method to compare the true clinical effect of the prosthesis to that of fusion surgery.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title>Aim<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>The objective of this study was to compare clinical outcome of cervical arthroplasty (ACDA) to the clinical outcome of fusion (ACDF) after anterior cervical discectomy in patients exclusively suffering from radiculopathy, and to evaluate differences with mixed patient populations.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>A literature search was completed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, COCHRANE, CENTRAL and CINAHL using a sensitive search strategy. Studies were selected by predefined selection criteria (i.a.) patients exclusively suffering from cervical radiculopathy), and risk of bias was assessed using a validated Cochrane Checklist adjusted for this purpose. An additional overview of results was added from articles considering a mix of patients suffering from myelopathy with or without radiculopathy.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>Eight studies were included that exclusively compared intervertebral devices in radiculopathy patients. Additionally, 29 articles concerning patients with myelopathy with or without radiculopathy were studied in a separate results table. All articles showed intermediate to high risk of bias. There was neither a difference in decrease in mean NDI score between the prosthesis (20.6 points) and the fusion (20.3 points) group, nor was there a clinically important difference in neck pain (VAS). Comparing these data to the mixed population data demonstrated comparable mean values, except for the 2-year follow-up NDI values in the prosthesis group: mixed group patients that received a prosthesis reported a mean NDI score of 15.6, indicating better clinical outcome than the radiculopathy patients that received a prosthesis though not reaching clinical importance.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>ACDF and ACDA are comparably effective in treating cervical radiculopathy due to a herniated disc in radiculopathy patients. Comparing the 8 radiculopathy with the 29 mixed population studies demonstrated that no clinically relevant differences were present in clinical outcome between the two types of patients.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title>Graphic abstract<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. <\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-019-06175-y","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2019,10,23]],"date-time":"2019-10-23T04:27:21Z","timestamp":1571804841000},"page":"2640-2654","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":15,"title":["Cervical radiculopathy: is a prosthesis preferred over fusion surgery? A systematic review"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"29","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-1575-7976","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Caroline M. W.","family":"Goedmakers","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Tessa","family":"Janssen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Xiaoyu","family":"Yang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Mark P.","family":"Arts","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Ronald H. M. A.","family":"Bartels","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Carmen L. A.","family":"Vleggeert-Lankamp","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2019,10,22]]},"reference":[{"key":"6175_CR1","first-page":"223","volume":"96","author":"RA Robinson","year":"1955","unstructured":"Robinson RA, Smith GW (1955) Anterolateral cervical disc removal and interbody fusion for cervical disc syndrome. Bull John Hopkins Hosp. 96:223\u2013224","journal-title":"Bull John Hopkins Hosp."},{"key":"6175_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"602","DOI":"10.3171\/jns.1958.15.6.0602","volume":"15","author":"RB Cloward","year":"1958","unstructured":"Cloward RB (1958) The anterior approach for ruptured cervical discs. J Neurosurg 15:602\u2013614","journal-title":"J Neurosurg"},{"key":"6175_CR3","unstructured":"Dereymaeker A, Mulier J: [Vertebral fusion by a ventral approach in cervical intervertebral disk disorders.] Rev Neurol. (Paris) 99:597\u2013616, 19589 (Fr)"},{"key":"6175_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"417","DOI":"10.3171\/spi.2005.3.6.0417","volume":"3","author":"JT Robertson","year":"2005","unstructured":"Robertson JT, Papadopoulos SM, Traynelis VC (2005) Assessment of adjacent-segment disease in patients treated with cervical fusion or arthroplasty: a prospective 2-year study. J Neurosurg Spine 3:417\u2013423","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"6175_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2431","DOI":"10.1097\/00007632-200211150-00003","volume":"27","author":"JC Eck","year":"2002","unstructured":"Eck JC, Humphreys SC, Lim TH et al (2002) Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion. Spine 27:2431\u20132434","journal-title":"Spine"},{"issue":"11","key":"6175_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1625","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2017.05.019","volume":"17","author":"RHMA Bartels","year":"2017","unstructured":"Bartels RHMA, Donk RD, Verhagen WIM, Hosman AJF, Verbeek ALM (2017) Reporting the results of meta-analyses: a plea for incorporating clinical relevance referring to an example. Spine J 17(11):1625\u20131632","journal-title":"Spine J"},{"issue":"7","key":"6175_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e1000097","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1000097","volume":"6","author":"D Moher","year":"2009","unstructured":"Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6(7):e1000097","journal-title":"PLoS Med"},{"key":"6175_CR8","unstructured":"Form for quality assessment of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Dutch Cochrane Quality Assessment. https:\/\/netherlands.cochrane.org\/sites\/netherlands.cochrane.org\/files\/public\/uploads\/4.4_rct_checklist.pdf. Accessed 18 Dec 2017"},{"issue":"6","key":"6175_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"469","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2010.02.007","volume":"10","author":"LY Carreon","year":"2010","unstructured":"Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Campbell MJ, Anderson PA (2010) Neck Disability Index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion. The Spine Journal 10(6):469\u2013474","journal-title":"The Spine Journal"},{"issue":"7","key":"6175_CR10","first-page":"409","volume":"14","author":"H Vernon","year":"1991","unstructured":"Vernon H, Mior S (1991) The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 14(7):409\u2013415","journal-title":"J Manipulative Physiol Ther"},{"issue":"6","key":"6175_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e67408","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0067408","volume":"8","author":"BM Auffinger","year":"2013","unstructured":"Auffinger BM, Lall RR, Dahdaleh NS, Wong AP, Lam SK, Koski T et al (2013) Measuring surgical outcomes in cervical spondylotic myelopathy patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: assessment of minimum clinically important difference. PLoS ONE 8(6):e67408. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0067408","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"issue":"4","key":"6175_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"342","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ctim.2013.04.005","volume":"21","author":"R Lauche","year":"2013","unstructured":"Lauche R, Langhorst J, Dobos GJ, Cramer H (2013) Clinically meaningful differences in pain, disability and quality of life for chronic nonspecific neck pain\u2014a reanalysis of 4 randomized controlled trials of cupping therapy. Complement Ther Med 21(4):342\u2013347. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ctim.2013.04.005","journal-title":"Complement Ther Med"},{"issue":"7454","key":"6175_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1490","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.328.7454.1490","volume":"328","author":"D Atkins","year":"2004","unstructured":"Atkins D, Best D, Briss P, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y (2004) Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 328(7454):1490","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"18","key":"6175_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1929","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0b013e3181b1c99f","volume":"34","author":"AD Furlan","year":"2009","unstructured":"Furlan AD, Pennick V, Bombardier C, van Tulder M (2009) 2009 updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group. Spine 34(18):1929\u20131941","journal-title":"Spine"},{"issue":"4","key":"6175_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"516","DOI":"10.3171\/2014.6.SPINE13996","volume":"21","author":"J Burkus","year":"2014","unstructured":"Burkus J, Traynelis V, Haid R, Mummaneni P (2014) Clinical and radiographic analysis of an artificial cervical disc: 7-year follow-up from the Prestige prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 21(4):516\u2013528","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"6175_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"308","DOI":"10.3171\/2010.3.SPINE09513","volume":"13","author":"JK Burkus","year":"2010","unstructured":"Burkus JK, Haid RW, Traynelis VC, Mummaneni PV (2010) Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc replacement with the Prestige disc: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 13:308\u2013318","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"issue":"4","key":"6175_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"122","DOI":"10.1016\/j.esas.2010.09.001","volume":"4","author":"R Delamarter","year":"2010","unstructured":"Delamarter R, Murrey D, Janssen M, Goldstein J, Zigler J, Tay B et al (2010) Results at 24\u00a0months from the prospective, randomized, multicenter Investigational Device Exemption trial of ProDisc-C versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with 4-year follow-up and continued access patients. SAS J 4(4):122\u2013128","journal-title":"SAS J"},{"issue":"4","key":"6175_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"275","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2008.05.006","volume":"9","author":"D Murrey","year":"2009","unstructured":"Murrey D, Janssen M, Delamarter R, Goldstein J, Zigler J, Tay B et al (2009) Results of the prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-C total disc replacement versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of 1-level symptomatic cervical disc disease. Spine J 9(4):275\u2013286","journal-title":"Spine J"},{"issue":"3","key":"6175_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"203","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0b013e318278eb38","volume":"38","author":"J Zigler","year":"2013","unstructured":"Zigler J, Delamarter R, Murrey D, Spivak J, Janssen M (2013) ProDisc-C and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as surgical treatment for single-level cervical symptomatic degenerative disc disease. Spine 38(3):203\u2013209","journal-title":"Spine"},{"issue":"7","key":"6175_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2263","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-016-4431-6","volume":"25","author":"T Loumeau","year":"2016","unstructured":"Loumeau T, Darden B, Kesman T, Odum S, Van Doren B, Laxer EB, Murrey D (2016) A RCT comparing 7-year clinical outcomes of one level symptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD) following ProDisc-C total disc arthroplasty (TDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Eur Spine J 25(7):2263\u20132270","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"issue":"21","key":"6175_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1738","DOI":"10.2106\/JBJS.N.01186","volume":"97","author":"M Janssen","year":"2015","unstructured":"Janssen M, Zigler J, Spivak J, Delamarter R, Darden B, Kopjar B (2015) ProDisc-C total disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for single-level symptomatic cervical disc disease. J Bone Joint Surg 97(21):1738\u20131747","journal-title":"J Bone Joint Surg"},{"issue":"18","key":"6175_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1935","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0b013e31813162d8","volume":"32","author":"A Nabhan","year":"2007","unstructured":"Nabhan A, Ahlhelm F, Shariat K, Pitzen T, Steimer O, Steudel W et al (2007) The ProDisc-C prothesis: clinical and radiological experience 1\u00a0year after surgery. Spine 32(18):1935\u20131941","journal-title":"Spine"},{"issue":"3","key":"6175_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"229","DOI":"10.1615\/JLongTermEffMedImplants.v17.i3.60","volume":"17","author":"A Nabhan","year":"2007","unstructured":"Nabhan A, Steudel W, Pape D, Ishak B (2007) Segmental kinematics and adjacent level degeneration following disc replacement versus fusion: RCT with three years of follow-up. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 17(3):229\u2013236","journal-title":"J Long Term Eff Med Implants"},{"issue":"6","key":"6175_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"829","DOI":"10.1302\/0301-620X.98B6.36381","volume":"98B","author":"Y Hou","year":"2016","unstructured":"Hou Y, Nie L, Pan X, Si M, Han Y, Li J et al (2016) Effectiveness and safety of Mobi-C for treatment of single-level cervical disc spondylosis: a randomised control trial with a minimum of five years of follow-up. Bone Joint J 98B(6):829\u2013833","journal-title":"Bone Joint J"},{"issue":"12","key":"6175_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2533","DOI":"10.1007\/s00264-014-2497-5","volume":"38","author":"H Zhang","year":"2014","unstructured":"Zhang H, Shao Y, Chen Y, Hou Y, Cheng L, Si M et al (2014) A prospective, randomised, controlled multicentre study comparing cervical disc replacement with anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Int Orthop 38(12):2533\u20132541","journal-title":"Int Orthop"},{"issue":"4","key":"6175_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"217","DOI":"10.3340\/jkns.2008.44.4.217","volume":"44","author":"J Park","year":"2008","unstructured":"Park J, Roh K, Cho J, Ra Y, Rhim S, Noh S (2008) Comparative analysis of cervical arthroplasty using mobi-c\u00ae and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using the solis\u00ae -cage. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 44(4):217\u2013221","journal-title":"J Korean Neurosurg Soc"},{"issue":"4","key":"6175_CR27","first-page":"239","volume":"37","author":"V Sala","year":"2015","unstructured":"Sala V, Lisi C, Di Natali G, Zanellato S, Dall\u2019Angelo A, Tinelli C et al (2015) Functional and quality of life evaluation after single level cervical discectomy and fusion or cervical disc replacement. G Ital Med Lav 37(4):239\u2013244","journal-title":"G Ital Med Lav"},{"issue":"1","key":"6175_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"36","DOI":"10.3171\/2012.9.SPINE12555","volume":"18","author":"D Coric","year":"2013","unstructured":"Coric D, Kim PK, Clemente JD, Boltes MO, Nussbaum M, James S (2013) Prospective randomized study of cervical arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with long-term follow-up: results in 74 patients from a single site. J Neurosurg Spine 18(1):36\u201342","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"6175_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1225","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-016-4922-5","volume":"26","author":"J Sundseth","year":"2017","unstructured":"Sundseth J, Fredriksli O, Kolstad F, Johnsen L, Pripp A, Andresen H et al (2017) The Norwegian Cervical Arthroplasty Trial (NORCAT): 2-year clinical outcome after single-level cervical arthroplasty versus fusion\u2014a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, controlled multicenter study. Eur Spine J 26:1225\u20131235","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"issue":"12","key":"6175_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3408","DOI":"10.1007\/s11999-011-2039-z","volume":"469","author":"L Cheng","year":"2011","unstructured":"Cheng L, Nie L, Li M, Huo Y, Pan X (2011) Superiority of the bryan\u00ae disc prosthesis for cervical myelopathy: a randomized study with 3-year followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(12):3408\u20133414","journal-title":"Clin Orthop Relat Res"},{"issue":"1","key":"6175_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"31","DOI":"10.3171\/spi.2006.4.1.31","volume":"4","author":"D Coric","year":"2006","unstructured":"Coric D, Finger F, Boltes P (2006) Prospective randomized controlled study of the Bryan Cervical Disc: early clinical results from a single investigational site. J Neurosurg Spine 4(1):31\u201335","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"issue":"6","key":"6175_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"715","DOI":"10.3171\/2010.5.SPINE09852","volume":"13","author":"D Coric","year":"2010","unstructured":"Coric D, Cassis J, Carew J, Boltes M (2010) Prospective study of cervical arthroplasty in 98 patients involved in 1 of 3 separate investigational device exemption studies from a single investigational site with a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 13(6):715\u2013721","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"issue":"4","key":"6175_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"348","DOI":"10.3171\/2011.5.SPINE10769","volume":"15","author":"D Coric","year":"2011","unstructured":"Coric D, Nunley P, Guyer R, Musante D, Carmody C, Gordon C et al (2011) Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kineflex|C artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 15(4):348\u2013358","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"6175_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.3171\/2014.7.SPINE13953","volume":"22","author":"RJ Davis","year":"2015","unstructured":"Davis RJ, Nunley PD, Kim KD et al (2015) Two-level total disc replacement with Mobi-C cervical artificial disc versus anterior discectomy and fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial with 4-year follow-up results. J Neurosurg Spine 22:15\u201325","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"6175_CR35","first-page":"32","volume":"32","author":"C Ding","year":"2012","unstructured":"Ding C, Liu H, Hu T et al (2012) Clinical outcomes of Prestige LP cervical disc replacement a prospective controlled single site trail with 24-month follow up. Chin J Orthop 32:32\u201338","journal-title":"Chin J Orthop"},{"key":"6175_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"627","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-013-3123-8","volume":"23","author":"LY Fay","year":"2014","unstructured":"Fay LY, Huang WC, Tsai TY et al (2014) Differences between arthroplasty and anterior cervical fusion in two-level cervical degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J 23:627\u2013634","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"issue":"6","key":"6175_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"367","DOI":"10.1097\/BSD.0b013e3181bb8568","volume":"23","author":"B Garrido","year":"2010","unstructured":"Garrido B, Taha T, Sasso R (2010) Clinical outcomes of bryan cervical disc arthroplasty a prospective, randomized, controlled, single site trial with 48-month follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 23(6):367\u2013371","journal-title":"J Spinal Disord Tech"},{"key":"6175_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"24","DOI":"10.14444\/3024","volume":"10","author":"M Gornet","year":"2016","unstructured":"Gornet M, Burkus J, Shaffrey M, Nian H, Harrell F (2016) Cervical disc arthroplasty with prestige LP disc versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: seven-year outcomes. Int J Spine Surg 10:24","journal-title":"Int J Spine Surg"},{"issue":"Suppl 7","key":"6175_CR39","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"842","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-015-4281-7","volume":"24","author":"G Grasso","year":"2015","unstructured":"Grasso G (2015) Clinical and radiological features of hybrid surgery in multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J 24(Suppl 7):842\u2013848","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"key":"6175_CR40","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"10","DOI":"10.14444\/3010","volume":"10","author":"M Hisey","year":"2016","unstructured":"Hisey M, Zigler J, Jackson R, Nunley P, Bae H, Kim K et al (2016) Prospective, randomized comparison of one-level Mobi-C cervical total disc replacement vs anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: results at 5-year follow-up. Int J Spine Surg 10:10","journal-title":"Int J Spine Surg"},{"key":"6175_CR41","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"867","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2013.07.432","volume":"14","author":"Y Hou","year":"2014","unstructured":"Hou Y, Liu Y, Yuan W et al (2014) Cervical kinematics and radiological changes after discover artificial disc replacement versus fusion. Spine J 14:867\u2013877","journal-title":"Spine J"},{"issue":"6","key":"6175_CR42","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"424","DOI":"10.3171\/spi.2005.3.6.0424","volume":"3","author":"RJ Hacker","year":"2005","unstructured":"Hacker RJ (2005) Cervical disc arthroplasty: a controlled randomized prospective study with intermediate follow-up results. J Neurosurg Spine 3(6):424\u2013428","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"6175_CR43","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1043","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2010.08.014","volume":"10","author":"A Jawahar","year":"2010","unstructured":"Jawahar A, Cavanaugh DA, Kerr EJ, Birdsong EM, Nunley PD (2010) Total disc arthroplasty does not affect the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical spine: results of 93 patients in three prospective randomized clinical trials. Spine J 10:1043\u20131048","journal-title":"Spine J"},{"issue":"2","key":"6175_CR44","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"218","DOI":"10.1007\/s00586-008-0854-z","volume":"18","author":"SW Kim","year":"2009","unstructured":"Kim SW, Limson MA, Kim SB et al (2009) Comparison of radiographic changes after ACDF versus Bryan disc arthroplasty in single and bi-level cases. Eur Spine J 18(2):218\u2013231","journal-title":"Eur Spine J"},{"issue":"6","key":"6175_CR45","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"942","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jocn.2013.09.007","volume":"21","author":"Z Li","year":"2014","unstructured":"Li Z, Yu S, Zhao Y, Hou S, Fu Q, Li F et al (2014) Clinical and radiologic comparison of dynamic cervical implant arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease. J Clin Neurosci 21(6):942\u2013948","journal-title":"J Clin Neurosci"},{"issue":"10","key":"6175_CR46","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"674","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0000000000000869","volume":"40","author":"F Phillips","year":"2015","unstructured":"Phillips F, Geisler F, Gilder K, Reah C, Howell K, McAfee P (2015) Long-term outcomes of the US FDA IDE prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine 40(10):674\u2013683","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"6175_CR47","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"E6","DOI":"10.3171\/foc.2004.17.3.6","volume":"17","author":"F Porchet","year":"2004","unstructured":"Porchet F, Metcalf NH (2004) Clinical outcomes with the Prestige II cervical disc: preliminary results from a prospective randomized clinical trial. Neurosurg Focus 17:E6","journal-title":"Neurosurg Focus"},{"issue":"11","key":"6175_CR48","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2354","DOI":"10.2106\/JBJS.G.01608","volume":"90","author":"KD Riew","year":"2008","unstructured":"Riew KD, Buchowski JM, Sasso R, Zdeblick T, Metcalf NH, Anderson PA (2008) Cervical disc arthroplasty compared with arthrodesis for the treatment of myelopathy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90(11):2354\u20132364","journal-title":"J Bone Joint Surg Am"},{"key":"6175_CR49","first-page":"E71","volume":"37","author":"J Riina","year":"2008","unstructured":"Riina J, Patel A, Dietz JW, Hoskins JS, Trammell TR et al (2008) Comparison of single-level cervical fusion and a metal-on-metal cervical disc replacement device. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 37:E71\u2013E77","journal-title":"Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ)."},{"issue":"5","key":"6175_CR50","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"515","DOI":"10.1097\/BSD.0000000000000170","volume":"30","author":"M Ro\u017eankovi\u0107","year":"2017","unstructured":"Ro\u017eankovi\u0107 M, Marasanov SM, Vuki\u0107 M (2017) Cervical disk replacement with discover versus fusion in a single-level cervical disk disease: a prospective single-center randomized trial with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Clin Spine Surg 30(5):515\u2013522","journal-title":"Clin Spine Surg"},{"issue":"7","key":"6175_CR51","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"481","DOI":"10.1097\/BSD.0b013e3180310534","volume":"20","author":"R Sasso","year":"2007","unstructured":"Sasso R, Smucker J, Hacker R, Heller J (2007) Clinical outcomes of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial with 24-month follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 20(7):481\u2013491","journal-title":"J Spinal Disord Tech"},{"issue":"18","key":"6175_CR52","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1684","DOI":"10.2106\/JBJS.J.00476","volume":"93","author":"RC Sasso","year":"2011","unstructured":"Sasso RC, Anderson PA, Riew KD, Heller JG (2011) Results of cervical arthroplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: four-year clinical outcomes in a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93(18):1684\u20131692","journal-title":"J Bone Joint Surg Am"},{"issue":"4","key":"6175_CR53","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"741","DOI":"10.1227\/01.NEU.0000325495.79104.DB","volume":"63","author":"M Steinmetz","year":"2008","unstructured":"Steinmetz M, Patel R, Traynelis V, Resnick D, Anderson P (2008) Cervical disc arthroplasty compared with fusion in a workers\u2019 compensation population. Neurosurgery 63(4):741\u2013747","journal-title":"Neurosurgery"},{"issue":"26","key":"6175_CR54","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2227","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0000000000000031","volume":"38","author":"A Vaccaro","year":"2013","unstructured":"Vaccaro A, Beutler W, Peppelman W, Marzluff J, Highsmith J, Mugglin A et al (2013) Clinical outcomes with selectively constrained SECURE-C cervical disc arthroplasty. Spine 38(26):2227\u20132239","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"6175_CR55","first-page":"328","volume":"46","author":"Y Wang","year":"2008","unstructured":"Wang Y, Cai B, Zhang XS et al (2008) Clinical outcomes of single level Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective controlled study. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 46:328\u2013332","journal-title":"Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi"},{"key":"6175_CR56","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2692","DOI":"10.12659\/MSM.905178","volume":"23","author":"S Yan","year":"2017","unstructured":"Yan S, Di J, Shen Y (2017) Adjacent segment degeneration following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus the bryan cervical disc arthroplasty. Med Sci Monit 23:2692\u20132700","journal-title":"Med Sci Monit"},{"issue":"6","key":"6175_CR57","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"433","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0b013e31822699fa","volume":"37","author":"X Zhang","year":"2012","unstructured":"Zhang X, Zhang X, Chen C, Zhang Y, Wang Z, Wang B et al (2012) Randomized, controlled, multicenter, clinical trial comparing BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion in China. Spine 37(6):433\u2013438","journal-title":"Spine"},{"issue":"6","key":"6175_CR58","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1153","DOI":"10.1227\/01.NEU.0000369189.09182.5F","volume":"66","author":"R Bartels","year":"2010","unstructured":"Bartels R, Donk R, Verbeek A (2010) No justification for cervical disc prostheses in clinical practice. Neurosurgery 66(6):1153\u20131160","journal-title":"Neurosurgery"},{"issue":"23","key":"6175_CR59","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1816","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0000000000001138","volume":"40","author":"F Gao","year":"2015","unstructured":"Gao F, Mao T, Sun W, Guo W, Wang Y, Li Z et al (2015) An updated meta-analysis comparing artificial cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD). Spine 40(23):1816\u20131823","journal-title":"Spine"},{"issue":"15","key":"6175_CR60","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e665","DOI":"10.1097\/MD.0000000000000665","volume":"94","author":"A Wu","year":"2015","unstructured":"Wu A, Xu H, Mullinix K, Jin H, Huang Z, Lv Q et al (2015) Minimum 4-year outcomes of cervical total disc arthroplasty versus fusion; a meta-analysis based on prospective randomized controlled trials. Medicine 94(15):e665","journal-title":"Medicine"},{"issue":"3","key":"6175_CR61","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e0117826","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0117826","volume":"10","author":"Y Zhang","year":"2015","unstructured":"Zhang Y, Liang C, Tao Y, Zhou X, Li H, Li F et al (2015) Cervical total disc replacement is superior to anterior cervical decompression and fusion: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials. PLoS ONE 10(3):e0117826","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"issue":"9","key":"6175_CR62","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1678","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2018.04.021","volume":"18","author":"X Yang","year":"2018","unstructured":"Yang X, Janssen T, Arts MP, Peul WC, Vleggeert-Lankamp CLA (2018) Radiological follow-up after implanting cervical disc prosthesis in anterior discectomy: a systematic review. Spine J. 18(9):1678\u20131693. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.spinee.2018.04.021","journal-title":"Spine J."}],"container-title":["European Spine Journal"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00586-019-06175-y.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00586-019-06175-y\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00586-019-06175-y.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2020,11,10]],"date-time":"2020-11-10T12:38:05Z","timestamp":1605011885000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00586-019-06175-y"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2019,10,22]]},"references-count":62,"journal-issue":{"issue":"11","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2020,11]]}},"alternative-id":["6175"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00586-019-06175-y","relation":{},"ISSN":["0940-6719","1432-0932"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0940-6719","type":"print"},{"value":"1432-0932","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2019,10,22]]},"assertion":[{"value":"14 February 2019","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"17 July 2019","order":2,"name":"revised","label":"Revised","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"5 October 2019","order":3,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"22 October 2019","order":4,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"The authors declare that they have no conflict on interest.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflict of interest"}}]}}