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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2016 Jul;25(7):2263-70.
doi: 10.1007/s00586-016-4431-6. Epub 2016 Feb 11.

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)

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

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)

Thomas P Loumeau et al. Eur Spine J. 2016 Jul.

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this trial was to compare the safety and efficacy of TDA using the ProDisc-C implant to ACDF in patients with single-level SCDD between C3 and C7.

Methods: We report on the single-site results from a larger multicenter trial of 13 sites using an approved US Food and Drug Administration protocol (prospective, randomized controlled non-inferiority design). Patients were randomized one-to-one to either the ProDisc-C device or ACDF. All enrollees were evaluated pre- and post-operatively at regular intervals through month 84. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for neck and arm pain/intensity, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Short-Form 36 (SF-36), and satisfaction were assessed.

Results: Twenty-two patients were randomized to each arm of the study. Nineteen additional patients received the ProDisc-C via continued access. NDI improved with the ProDisc-C more than with ACDF. Total range of motion was maintained with the ProDisc-C, but diminished with ACDF. Neck and arm pain improved more in the ProDisc-C than ACDF group. Patient satisfaction remained higher in the ProDisc-C group at 7 years. SF-36 scores were higher in the TDA group than ACDF group at 7 years; the difference was not clinically significant. Six additional operations (two at the same level; four at an adjacent level) were performed in the ACDF, but none in the ProDisc-C group.

Conclusions: The ProDisc-C implant appears to be safe and effective for the treatment of SCDD. Patients with the implant retained motion at the involved segment and had a lower reoperation rate than those with an ACDF.

Keywords: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; Clinical trial; Outcomes; ProDisc-C; Symptomatic cervical disc disease; Total disc arthroplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Eur Spine J. 2014 May;23(5):1115-23 - PubMed
    1. Evid Based Spine Care J. 2012 Feb;3(S1):31-8 - PubMed
    1. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Mar 20;95(6):555-61 - PubMed
    1. Spine J. 2009 Apr;9(4):275-86 - PubMed
    1. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Mar 15;37(6):445-51 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Supplementary concepts

LinkOut - more resources