{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]],"date-time":"2026-09-03T18:22:50Z","timestamp":1788459770228,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":23,"publisher":"Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)","content-domain":{"domain":["lww.com","ovid.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":[],"abstract":"\n Study Design:<\/jats:title>\n Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Objectives:<\/jats:title>\n To compare the efficacy and safety of ACDF versus PCF for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Summary of Background Data:<\/jats:title>\n ACDF is widely regarded as the standard surgical treatment for cervical radiculopathy, providing reliable symptom relief but carrying risks such as adjacent segment disease, pseudoarthrosis, and implant-related complications. PCF represents a motion-preserving alternative that avoids anterior approach-related morbidity. Despite existing comparative studies, the optimal surgical approach remains controversial.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Methods:<\/jats:title>\n \n A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing ACDF and PCF for cervical radiculopathy. The primary outcome was clinical efficacy assessed using the Odom criteria. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications, revision surgery, and treatment satisfaction. Pooled analyses were performed using random-effects models, and heterogeneity was assessed with the I\n 2<\/jats:sup>\n statistic.\n <\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Results:<\/jats:title>\n \n Five randomized controlled trials involving 568 patients were included, with 284 patients (50%) undergoing ACDF. Mean follow-up ranged from 12 to 50.4 months. There was no significant difference between ACDF and PCF in the proportion of patients achieving excellent or good outcomes according to the Odom criteria (OR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.48\u20132.87;\n P<\/jats:italic>\n =0.72). Perioperative complication rates (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.10\u20131.76;\n P<\/jats:italic>\n =0.24), revision surgery rates (OR: 1.39; 95% CI: 0.66\u20132.94;\n P<\/jats:italic>\n =0.39), and treatment satisfaction (OR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.54\u20131.37;\n P<\/jats:italic>\n =0.62) were also comparable between groups.\n <\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Conclusion:<\/jats:title>\n This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials demonstrates no significant differences between ACDF and PCF in terms of clinical efficacy, safety, revision surgery, or patient satisfaction for cervical radiculopathy. Given its motion-preserving nature and avoidance of anterior approach-related complications, PCF remains a valid surgical alternative in selected patients.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1097\/bsd.0000000000002136","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]],"date-time":"2026-09-03T18:01:02Z","timestamp":1788458462000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/lww.0000000000001000","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy for Cervical Radiculopathy"],"prefix":"10.1097","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0006-9287-0370","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Jos\u00e9 O.D.","family":"Tom\u00e9","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Surgery Section, Medical School of ABC, Santo Andr\u00e9, Brazil"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Rafael C.","family":"de Souza","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Surgery Section, Medical School of ABC, Santo Andr\u00e9, Brazil"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Wilker H.","family":"de Oliveira","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Surgery Section, Medical School of ABC, Santo Andr\u00e9, Brazil"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Bruno V.","family":"Motter","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Surgery Section, Medical School of ABC, Santo Andr\u00e9, Brazil"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Guilherme","family":"Foizer","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Surgery Section, Medical School of ABC, Santo Andr\u00e9, Brazil"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Andr\u00e9 E.M.","family":"C\u00e9sar","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Surgery Section, Medical School of ABC, Santo Andr\u00e9, Brazil"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Luciano M.R.","family":"Rodrigues","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Federal University of S\u00e3o Paulo, S\u00e3o Paulo, Brazil"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"276","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,2]]},"reference":[{"key":"R1-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"E251","DOI":"10.1097\/BSD.0000000000000284","article-title":"Cervical radiculopathy: epidemiology, etiology, diagnosis, and treatment","volume":"28","author":"Woods","year":"2015","journal-title":"J Spinal Disord Tech"},{"key":"R2-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"272","DOI":"10.1007\/s12178-016-9349-4","article-title":"Cervical radiculopathy","volume":"9","author":"Iyer","year":"2016","journal-title":"Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med"},{"key":"R3-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"607","DOI":"10.2106\/00004623-195840030-00009","article-title":"The treatment of certain cervical-spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion","volume":"40-A","author":"Smith","year":"1958","journal-title":"J Bone Joint Surg Am"},{"key":"R4-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"347","DOI":"10.3171\/2008.12.SPINE08576","article-title":"The posterior cervical foraminotomy in the treatment of cervical disc\/osteophyte disease: a single-surgeon experience with a minimum of 5 years\u2019 clinical and radiographic follow-up","volume":"10","author":"Jagannathan","year":"2009","journal-title":"J Neurosurg Spine"},{"key":"R5-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"129","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2474-15-129","article-title":"CASINO: surgical or nonsurgical treatment for cervical radiculopathy, a randomised clinical trial","volume":"15","author":"Geest","year":"2014","journal-title":"BMC Musculoskelet Disord"},{"issue":"suppl","key":"R6-20260903","first-page":"S37","article-title":"Minimally invasive cervical micro-endoscopic foraminotomy: an initial clinical experience","volume":"51","author":"Fessler","year":"2002","journal-title":"Neurosurgery"},{"key":"R7-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"154","DOI":"10.1016\/j.spinee.2006.03.007","article-title":"Minimally invasive tubular access for posterior cervical foraminotomy with three-dimensional microscopic visualization and localization with anterior\/posterior imaging","volume":"7","author":"Hilton","year":"2007","journal-title":"Spine J"},{"key":"R8-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"E9","DOI":"10.1227\/NEU.0000000000000775","article-title":"Comparison of outcomes for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior cervical foraminotomy: a systematic review","volume":"38","author":"Wang","year":"2015","journal-title":"Neurosurg Focus"},{"key":"R9-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"E365","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0000000000002324","article-title":"Surgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials","volume":"43","author":"Gutman","year":"2018","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R10-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1731","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0000000000003156","article-title":"Minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for unilateral cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis","volume":"44","author":"Sahai","year":"2019","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R11-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"102852","DOI":"10.1016\/j.bas.2024.102852","article-title":"Minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical fusion and arthroplasty: systematic review and updated meta-analysis","volume":"4","author":"Fang","year":"2024","journal-title":"Brain Spine"},{"key":"R12-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"202","DOI":"10.1186\/s13018-020-01723-5","article-title":"Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior cervical foraminotomy for the treatment of single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy: a meta-analysis","volume":"15","author":"Fang","year":"2020","journal-title":"J Orthop Surg Res"},{"key":"R13-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"71","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.n71","article-title":"The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews","volume":"372","author":"Page","year":"2021","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"R14-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1026","DOI":"10.1097\/00007632-199015100-00009","article-title":"Surgical management of cervical soft disc herniation: a comparison between the anterior and posterior approach","volume":"15","author":"Herkowitz","year":"1990","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R15-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"40","DOI":"10.1001\/jamaneurol.2022.4208","article-title":"Noninferiority of posterior cervical foraminotomy vs anterior cervical discectomy with fusion for procedural success and reduction in arm pain among patients with cervical radiculopathy at 1 year: the FACET randomized clinical trial","volume":"80","author":"Broekema","year":"2023","journal-title":"JAMA Neurol"},{"key":"R16-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"940","DOI":"10.1097\/BRS.0b013e31816c8b67","article-title":"Full-endoscopic cervical posterior foraminotomy for the operation of lateral disc herniations using 5.9-mm endoscopes: a prospective, randomized, controlled study","volume":"33","author":"Ruetten","year":"2008","journal-title":"Spine"},{"key":"R17-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"340","DOI":"10.1016\/S0090-3019(00)00201-9","article-title":"Cervical discectomy: a prospective analysis of three operative techniques","volume":"53","author":"Wirth","year":"2000","journal-title":"Surg Neurol"},{"key":"R18-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.3310\/OTOH7720","article-title":"Posterior cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical discectomy for cervical brachialgia: the FORVAD RCT","volume":"27","author":"Thomson","year":"2023","journal-title":"Health Technol Assess"},{"key":"R19-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"l4898","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.l4898","article-title":"RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials","volume":"366","author":"Sterne","year":"2019","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"R20-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"667","DOI":"10.2106\/JBJS.22.01211","article-title":"Short-term neck pain after posterior foraminotomy compared with anterior discectomy with fusion for cervical foraminal radiculopathy: a secondary analysis of the FACET randomized controlled trial","volume":"105","author":"Sim\u00f5es de Souza","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Bone Joint Surg Am"},{"key":"R21-20260903","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2182","DOI":"10.2106\/JBJS.20.00324","article-title":"Surgical interventions for cervical radiculopathy without myelopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis","volume":"102","author":"Broekema","year":"2020","journal-title":"J Bone Joint Surg Am"},{"key":"R22-20260903","first-page":"100059","article-title":"Anterior versus posterior approach for cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis","volume":"2","author":"Li","year":"2022","journal-title":"Brain Spine"},{"key":"R23-20260903","first-page":"e22744","article-title":"Comparison of anterior and posterior approaches for cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis","volume":"99","author":"Wu","year":"2020","journal-title":"Medicine"}],"container-title":["Clinical Spine Surgery"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.ovid.com\/10.1097\/BSD.0000000000002136","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]],"date-time":"2026-09-03T18:01:06Z","timestamp":1788458466000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.ovid.com\/10.1097\/BSD.0000000000002136"}},"subtitle":["A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials"],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,2]]},"references-count":23,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/bsd.0000000000002136","relation":{},"ISSN":["2380-0186","2380-0194"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2380-0186","type":"print"},{"value":"2380-0194","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,2]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2025-06-26","name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2026-07-23","name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}