uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Comparison of dysphagia between cervical artificial disc replacement and fusion: data from a randomized controlled study with two years of follow-up
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Orthopaedics.
2013 (English)In: Spine, ISSN 0362-2436, E-ISSN 1528-1159, Vol. 38, no 24, E1507-E1510 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]


Prospective randomized controlled trial.


To determine and explain any differences in self-reported dysphagia between patients treated with artificial disc replacement and anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF).


Dysphagia after anterior cervical spine surgery has in previous studies been evaluated regarding different influencing factors. Surgical technique, number of treated levels, and type of implant has been shown to be of possible importance.


One hundred thirty-six patients from a randomized controlled trial between artificial disc replacement and ACDF in 1 or 2 surgical levels were evaluated regarding dysphagia. Evaluation was done with the dysphagia short questionnaire preoperatively, at 4 weeks, 3 months, and 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Reconstruction in the artificial disc replacement group was performed with the Discover artificial disc. Bone graft and anterior plating was used in the ACDF group. Type of implant was blinded to the patients and the surgeon until time of implantation.


Demographics and dysphagia short questionnaire levels were similar in both groups preoperative. At 4 weeks of follow-up postoperatively, dysphagia was significantly higher in both groups than baseline levels, P < 0.01. No significant differences were seen between the groups until follow-up at 2 years, which showed significantly higher dysphagia short questionnaire levels in the ACDF group, P = 0.04. The difference was statistically significant in both patients treated with 1- and 2-level surgery, P = 0.029 and P = 0.032, respectively. A logistic regression model showed a stronger association to type of implant than to number of surgical levels. Duration of surgery was highly associated to number of surgical levels but did not differ significantly between types of implant.


Long-term postoperative dysphagia could be explained by bulk of implant or decreased motion in the cervical spine. However, it is doubtful if differences between the groups in this study can be interpreted as a clinically important difference.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. Vol. 38, no 24, E1507-E1510 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-216207DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a516efISI: 000330378900001PubMedID: 23883828OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-216207DiVA: diva2:689229
Available from: 2014-01-20 Created: 2014-01-20 Last updated: 2014-03-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Olerud, Claes
By organisation
In the same journal
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 261 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link