The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.04.018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Metal-on-metal versus metal-on-plastic artificial discs in two-level anterior cervical disc replacement: a meta-analysis with follow-up of 5 years or more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Coban et al performed a meta-analysis and systemic review of previously published reports that evaluated patient-reported clinical outcomes, overall reoperation rates, complications, and rates of adjacent disc disease between CADs with metal-on-plastic and metal-on-metal designs. 58 ) They found superior clinical outcomes for metal-on-metal CAD in 2-level ACDR but higher rates of adjacent disc disease that require secondary surgery compared with metal-on-plastic CAD during a follow-up period of 5 years or longer. The path of motion of the instant center of rotation (COR) in the cervical spine during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension is the key issue in the design of CAD.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Coban et al performed a meta-analysis and systemic review of previously published reports that evaluated patient-reported clinical outcomes, overall reoperation rates, complications, and rates of adjacent disc disease between CADs with metal-on-plastic and metal-on-metal designs. 58 ) They found superior clinical outcomes for metal-on-metal CAD in 2-level ACDR but higher rates of adjacent disc disease that require secondary surgery compared with metal-on-plastic CAD during a follow-up period of 5 years or longer. The path of motion of the instant center of rotation (COR) in the cervical spine during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension is the key issue in the design of CAD.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Preserving as much cervical mobility as possible and reducing the incidence of adjacent segment disease (ASD) are crucial considerations for neurosurgeons in surgical planning. In Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology frontiersin.org contrast to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), artificial cervical disc replacement (ACDR) can maintain a certain mobility of the cervical spine after surgery and has gained widespread attention and clinical applications (Coban et al, 2021). The construction of ball-and-socket joints, whether metal-to-metal or metal-to-plastic, is regarded as the key to ensuring mobility for artificial cervical discs and is currently the mainstream design (Choi et al, 2017).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The construction of ball-and-socket joints, whether metal-to-metal or metal-to-plastic, is regarded as the key to ensuring mobility for artificial cervical discs and is currently the mainstream design ( Choi et al, 2017 ). However, the excessive ROM and rigid connection between the metal articular surfaces brought about by the design concept could increase the pressure on the facet joints ( Lee et al, 2011 ), with long-term overload leading to surgical segment degeneration and ASD, which increases the risks of prosthesis subsidence and dislocation ( Coban et al, 2021 ). Heterotopic ossification associated with prosthesis implantation is also considered a challenging problem that cannot be ignored ( Dey et al, 2017 ; Wang et al, 2018 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The mechanical test also proved that the durability can reach a normal person for more than 50 years (Shikinami et al, 2010). The current clinical research on the alternative treatment of intervertebral disc degeneration is mainly total disc replacement, and different artificial disc materials have a certain impact on the clinical efficacy (Coban et al, 2021). At the same time, the high recurrence rate and unclear risk factors for secondary surgery also limit the development of surgery (Perfetti et al, 2021).…”
Section: Preclinical Study Of Biomaterials For Intervertebral Disk Repairmentioning
confidence: 99%