RIP Cervical Disc Replacement: Side Effects Same as Fusion

By /

Cervical Disc Replacement Side Effects

I’ll never forget when a local surgeon, who was being paid handsomely by disc replacement manufacturers, placed his new credo “friends don’t let friends fuse” on his website. The idea was that now that we had disc replacement technology, keeping some motion in the spine would reduce the side effects compared to fusion. For the last decade-plus, that’s been the big push for cervical disc replacement over fusion. I’ve even had new patients come into the office, very proud that they flew to Europe to get the latest state-of-the-art multilevel cervical disc replacement. What if this wasn’t true? If you were told that disc replacement was no better than fusion, would you still want a small hockey puck-sized device jammed in the front of your neck?

Defining Cervical Disc Replacement and Cervical Fusion

Cervical disc replacement involves removing the damaged disc, preparing the surfaces of the vertebrae, and installing a metal or plastic manufactured disc that, as mentioned, is shaped like a small hockey puck. With a cervical fusion, the damaged disc is also removed, but instead of replacing the disc, hardware is used to bolt the two (or more depending on how many levels are involved) vertebrae together. Within a few months, the vertebrae grow together, fusing into a solid mass of bone.

What sets cervical disc replacement apart from cervical fusion is that the disc replacement retains movement in the involved area of the neck while the fusion permanently and irreversibly disables movement. As a concept, disc replacement is supposed to be an alternative to fusion that will eliminate pain and won’t disrupt function, thereby lessening the risk of adjacent segment disease (ASD).

ASD is damage caused to the spinal segments both above and below the neck fusion, and this occurs when they become overloaded while trying to take on the extra forces the fused levels can no longer accomplish. Arthritis and bone spurs typically develop with ASD. As ASD advances, many patients will opt for more fusions in a desperate attempt to chase the damage and pain, but this will only make matters worse. Unfortunately, however, ASD doesn’t only occur following cervical fusion. Let me explain. To better understand ASD, see my video below:

Request a Regenexx Appointment

Cervical Disc Replacement Side Effects and ASD

Cervical disc replacement certainly seems less extreme than a cervical fusion. It doesn’t eliminate movement. With the exception of the artificial disc device, no hardware (screws, rods, etc) is left attached to the spine. However, disc replacement is also a big surgery all on its own that’s associated with many side effects (e.g., metal ions in the blood due to wear and tear from the disc device, revision surgeries, chronic pain, etc.).

Last year I covered research that discovered another big problem in the list of cervical disc replacement side effects. Despite the push toward cervical disc replacement over cervical fusion due to fusion’s association with adjacent segment disease, ASD is also occurring is segments above and below disc replacements due to distorted movement in the spine. Why? Likely because an artificial disc simply can’t perfectly mimic the precise function of a normal biologic disc, so it’s understandable that abnormal motion in a segment of the spine is going to overwork adjoining segments that attempt to compensate.

Now, a new study seems to further support these findings on these specific cervical disc replacement side effects…

Cervical Disc Replacement Has the Same ASD Risk as Fusion

The new study was a meta-analysis, meaning many similar studies were aggregated to investigate like data, in this case the presence of ASD on radiology imaging following cervical disc replacement or fusion. After compiling all the data, researchers found no convincing evidence, based on radiology reports, that cervical disc replacement significantly decreased adjacent segment disease risk when compared to the fusion cases.

I can’t overstate the magnitude of this research finding! First, this is a meta-analysis that looked at data from many different studies, so this just isn’t just the finding of one study. Second, the main reason to get a disc replacement is that it’s motion preserving and that this is supposed to reduce the likelihood of ASD or eliminate it all together. In fact, if that’s true, I’m not sure why anyone would want a disc replacement.

The upshot? This meta-analysis should be the death knell for disc replacement. That’s because the only raison d’être for disc replacement was that it could reduce the ASD side effects compared to fusion. If it can’t do that, why would anyone want a disc replacement? Why is this still happening? A big neck surgery is a big neck surgery is a big neck surgery. They all end up destroying critical stabilizing structures in the neck.

Join us for a free Regenexx Cervical Spine Webinar

This blog post provides general information to help the reader better understand regenerative medicine, musculoskeletal health, and related subjects. All content provided in this blog, website, or any linked materials, including text, graphics, images, patient profiles, outcomes, and information, are not intended and should not be considered or used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Please always consult with a professional and certified healthcare provider to discuss if a treatment is right for you.

Get Blog Updates by Email

By submitting the form, you are agreeing that you read and consent to our Privacy Policy. We may also contact you via email, phone, and other electronic means to communicate information about our products and services. We do not sell, or share your information to third party vendors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

9 thoughts on “RIP Cervical Disc Replacement: Side Effects Same as Fusion

  1. stef

    What about tiger woods ? He seems to be doing fine…

    1. Regenexx Team

      Hope it continues, but we’ll be glad to treat him when Adjacent Segment Disease kicks in…

  2. Rory McQuiston, PhD.

    Well, I cannot find my original response to your naive and misinformed view of the future of cervical spine care. However, I will try to get it published here so that you cannot continue to publish misinformation regarding the technology available for people with cervical disc ruptures, like my own, which was “repaired” only to have the adjacent disc rupture nearly a year later. The vast majority of studies have shown that total disc replacements are superior in almost every manner.

    It is clear that people hoping for a better outcome immediately, and in the long term, should choose artificial discs. Please do not cherry pick bad data to try and convince someone in need that your inferior solution (ACDF) is a better path. It may be an easier surgery for you, but a poorer outcome for your patients.

    1. Chris Centeno Post author

      Rory, many of the studies you have posted were included in the meta-analysis quoted in this post or excluded due to having a mixed population of patients, see . Your n=1 experience is noted. Having said that, not sure why you would want to go after the results of a meta-analysis without actually taking apart that study. Meaning a meta-analysis may be invalid because it didn’t include enough patients in each group, included or excluded papers it shouldn’t have, or didn’t have enough apples to apples data to combine groups from different papers. However, claiming that the meta-analysis is invalid because it includes papers published by inexperienced surgeons without any evidence to support that supposition isn’t a valid critique. In addition, using individual research citations to refute a meta-analysis is non-sensical.

  3. Alicia K

    As someone with a disc replacement I wish I would have read this prior to my surgery. My replacement failed within 6 months and caused terrible bone spurs which are encroaching on my spinal canal and C6 nerve root. So now I’m facing my second surgery to remove this device and fuse my vertebrae. The concept is great but I think there needs to be more research done on these.

  4. Robert

    Did I miss what the Regenexx solution is in this article?

    1. Regenexx Team

      Hi Robert,
      No, you didn’t, as this was an article on the unintended issues of disc replacement. Here you’ll find how we treat Spinal issues, including those likely to lead to Disc Replacement or Fusion:

  5. Mark A Brier

    I’ve had 2 ADR surgeries in my neck in 2018. 4 months after my last one I am in worse shape than I was before the surgery. I was told ADR was more successful and had faster recovers. Not for me. Also, I have a list of 7 personal freinds/acquaintances who have had multi-level neck fusions. 1/2 have had add’l surgeries as I have BUT, all and I mean all of them are back to work with very little or no pain. And all of these people are over 45, most over 60. I feel like I was sold a bill of goods.

    1. Regenexx Team

      Hi Mark,
      Sorry to hear of your situation. ADR has not been the wonder it was supposed to be. We may be able to help with the Adjacenet Segment Disease. Please see: If you’d like to see if we could help in your case, please submit the Candidate form here:

Is Regenexx Right For You?

Request a free Regenexx Info Packet


Learn about the #1 Stem Cell & Platelet Procedures for treating arthritis, common joint injuries & spine pain.

Join a Webinar


Get fresh updates and insights from Regenexx delivered straight to your inbox.

Subscribe to the Blog


9035 Wadsworth Pkwy #1000
Westminster, CO 80021


Copyright © Regenexx 2021. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy

*DISCLAIMER: Like all medical procedures, Regenexx® Procedures have a success and failure rate. Patient reviews and testimonials on this site should not be interpreted as a statement on the effectiveness of our treatments for anyone else.

Providers listed on the Regenexx website are for informational purposes only and are not a recommendation from Regenexx for a specific provider or a guarantee of the outcome of any treatment you receive.