Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2015 Jan;24(1):31-9.
doi: 10.1007/s00586-014-3607-1. Epub 2014 Oct 18.

Anterior cervical discectomy versus corpectomy for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Anterior cervical discectomy versus corpectomy for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a meta-analysis

Shan-Wen Xiao et al. Eur Spine J. 2015 Jan.

Abstract

Purpose: This is a meta-analysis to compare the results between anterior cervical discectomy fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy fusion (ACCF) for the patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM).

Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies between ACDF with plate fixation and ACCF with plate fixation for the treatment of MCSM. An extensive search of literature was performed in PubMed, Mediline, Embase and the Cochrane library. The following outcome measures were extracted: JOA scores, fusion rate, cervical lordosis (C2-7), complications, blood loss and operation time. Data analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.0.

Results: Four cohorts (six studies) involving 258 patients were included in this study. The pooled analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the postoperative JOA score [WMD = -0.14 (-1.37, 1.10), P = 0.83], fusion rate [OR = 0.84 (0.15, 4.86), P = 0.85] between two group. However, there was significant difference in the cervical lordosis [WMD = 3.38 (2.52, 4.23), P < 0.00001], surgical complication rate and instrument related complication rate (P = 0.01, 0.005 respectively), blood loss [WMD = -52.53 (-73.53, -31.52), P < 0.00001], and operation time [WMD = -14.10 (-20.27, -7.93), P < 0.00001].

Conclusions: As compared with ACCF with plate fixation, ACDF with plate fixation showed no significant differences in terms of postoperative JOA score, fusion rate, but better improved cervical lordosis, lower complication and smaller surgical trauma. As the limitations of small sample and short follow-up in this study, it still could not be identified whether ACDF with plate fixation is more effective and safer than ACCF with plate fixation.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Eur Spine J. 2011 Sep;20(9):1539-44 - PubMed
    1. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 Apr 15;31(8):897-902 - PubMed
    1. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007 Apr;6(4):298-303 - PubMed
    1. Eur Spine J. 2005 Sep;14(7):677-82 - PubMed
    1. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2012 Feb;132(2):155-61 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources