Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Using the modified Delphi method to establish a new Chinese clinical consensus of the treatments for cervical radiculopathy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Although cervical radiculopathy is very common, there is no standard treatment for this condition, with little high-level evidence available to guide the treatment choice. Thus, this study aimed to review the current data on the management of cervical radiculopathy; and, further, to establish a new Chinese clinical consensus of the treatments for cervical radiculopathy using the Delphi method.

Methods

First, a systematic review of the previously established treatment guidelines and of articles related to cervical radiculopathy was conducted to establish a protocol for the clinical consensus of the treatment for cervical radiculopathy. Second, from February 2012 to June 2014, we performed a modified Delphi survey in which the current professional opinions from 30 experienced experts, representing almost all of the Chinese provinces, were gathered. Three rounds were performed, and consensus was defined as ≥70 % agreement.

Results

Consensus of the treatments for cervical radiculopathy was reached on seven aspects, including the proportion of patients requiring only non-surgical therapies; the effectiveness of neck immobilization, physiotherapy, pharmacologic treatment; surgical indications; contraindications; surgery.

Conclusions

The modified Delphi study conducted herein reached a consensus concerning several treatment issues for cervical radiculopathy. In the absence of high-level evidence, at present, these expert opinion findings will help guide health care providers to define the appropriate treatment in their regions. Items with no consensus provide excellent areas for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Radhakrishnan K, Litchy WJ, O’Fallon WM, Kurland LT (1994) Epidemiology of cervical radiculopathy: a population-based study from Rochester, Minnesota, 1976 through 1990. Brain 117:325–335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. North American Spine Society (2011) Evidence-based clinical guidelines for multidisciplinary spine care. Diagnosis and treatment of cervical radiculopathy from degenerative disease. Spine J 11:64–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Saal JS, Saal JA, Yurth E (1996) Nonoperative management of herniated cervical inter-vertebral disc with radiculopathy. Spine J 21:1877–1883

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kuijper B, Tans JT, Beelen A, Nollet F, de Visser M (2009) Cervical collar or physiotherapy versus wait and see policy for recent onset cervical radiculopathy: randomised trial. BMJ 339:b3883

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Levine MJ, Albert TJ, Smith MD (1996) Cervical radiculopathy: diagnosis and nonoperative management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 4:305–316

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Naylor JR, Mulley GP (1991) Surgical collars: a survey of their prescription and use. Br J Rheumatol 30:282–284

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cai C, Ming G, Ng LY (2011) Development of a clinical prediction rule to identify patients with neck pain who are likely to benefit from home-based mechanical cervical traction. Eur Spine J 20:912–922

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Childs JD, Cleland JA, Elliott JM et al (2008) Neck pain: clinical practice guidelines linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health from the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 38:A1–A34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Childs JD, Fritz JM, Piva SR, Whitman JM (2004) Proposal of a classification system for patients with neck pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 34:686–696

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fritz JM, Brennan GP (2007) Preliminary examination of a proposed treatment-based classification system for patients receiving physical therapy interventions for neck pain. Phys Ther 87:513–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Raney NH, Petersen EJ, Smith TA et al (2009) Development of a clinical prediction rule to identify patients with neck pain likely to benefit from cervical traction and exercise. Eur Spine J 18:382–391

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Constantoyannis C, Konstantinou D, Kourtopoulos H, Papadakis N (2002) Intermittent cervical traction for cervical radiculopathy caused by large-volume herniated disks. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 25:188–192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rhee JM, Yoon T, Riew KD (2007) Cervical radiculopathy. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 15:486–494

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fritz JM, Thackeray A, Brennan GP, Childs JD (2014) Exercise only, exercise with mechanical traction, or exercise with over-door traction for patients with cervical radiculopathy, with or without consideration of status on a previously described subgrouping rule: a randomized clinical trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 44:45–57

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jellad A, Ben Salah Z, Boudokhane S, Migaou H, Bahri I, Rejeb N (2009) The value of intermittent cervical traction in recent cervical radiculopathy. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 52:638–652

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Swezey RL, Swezey AM, Warner K (1999) Efficacy of home cervical traction therapy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 78:30–32

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Eubanks JD (2010) Cervical radiculopathy: nonoperative management of neck pain and radicular symptoms. Am Fam Physician 81:33–40

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nakajima M, Inoue M, Itoi M, Kitakoji H (2013) Clinical effect of acupuncture on cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: results of a case series. Acupunct Med 31:364–367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Clements DH, O’Leary PF (1990) Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine J 15:1023–1025

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Jacobs B, Krueger EG, Leivy DM (1970) Cervical spondylosis with radiculopathy. Results of anterior diskectomy and interbody fusion. JAMA 211:2135–2139

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Walker AE, Robinson RA (1962) Anterior cervical fusion. Dia Med 34:894–900

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gore DR, Sepic SB (1984) Anterior cervical fusion for degenerated or protruded discs. A review of one hundred forty-six patients. Spine J 9:667–671

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Bohlman HH, Emery SE, Goodfellow DB, Jones PK (1993) Robinson anterior cervical discectomy and arthrodesis for cervical radiculopathy. Long-term follow-up of one hundred and twenty-two patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75:1298–1307

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Islam MA, Islam MA, Habib MA, Sakeb N (2012) Anterior cervical discectomy, fusion and stabilization by plate and screw–early experience. Bangladesh Med Res Counc Bull 38:62–66

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Song KJ, Kim GH, Choi BY (2011) Efficacy of PEEK cages and plate augmentation in three-level anterior cervical fusion of elderly patients. Clin Orthop Surg 3:9–15

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pereira EA, Chari A, Hempenstall J, Leach JC, Chandran H, Cadoux-Hudson TA (2013) Anterior cervical discectomy plus intervertebral polyetheretherketone cage fusion over three and four levels without plating is safe and effective long-term. J Clin Neurosci 20:1250–1255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Cho DY, Lee WY, Sheu PC (2004) Treatment of multilevel cervical fusion with cages. Surg Neurol 62:378–385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Demircan MN, Kutlay AM, Colak A et al (2007) Multilevel cervical fusion without plates, screws or autogenous iliac crest bone graft. J Clin Neurosci 14:723–728

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bucciero A, Zorzi T, Piscopo GA (2008) Peek cage-assisted anterior cervical discectomy and fusion at four levels: clinical and radiographic results. J Neurosurg Sci 52:37–40

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Liu H, Ploumis A, Li C, Yi X, Li H (2012) Polyetheretherketone cages alone with allograft for three-level anterior cervical fusion. ISRN Neurol 2012:452703

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Zhou J, Li X, Dong J et al (2011) Three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with self-locking stand-alone polyetheretherketone cages. J Clin Neurosci 18:1505–1509

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Park JB, Cho YS, Riew KD (2005) Development of adjacent-level ossification in patients with an anterior cervical plate. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:558–563

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Fang LM, Zhang YJ, Zhang J, Li Q (2013) Efficacy evaluation of treating cervical spondylopathy with the Discover artificial cervical disc prosthesis. Zhonhua Yi Xue Za Zhi 93:2965–2968

    Google Scholar 

  34. Park SB, Jahng TA, Chung CK (2012) Remodeling of adjacent spinal alignments following cervical arthroplasty and anterior discectomy and fusion. Eur Spine J 21:322–327

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Liu F, Cheng J, Komistek RD, Mahfouz MR, Sharma A (2007) In vivo evaluation of dynamic characteristics of the normal, fused, and disc replacement cervical spines. Spine 32:2578–2584

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Park JH, Roh KH, Cho JY, Ra YS, Rhim SC, Noh SW (2008) Comparative analysis of cervical arthroplasty using mobi-c(r) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using the solis(r)-cage. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 44:217–221

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Robertson JT, Papadopoulos SM, Traynelis VC (2005) Assessment of adjacent-segment disease in patients treated with cervical fusion or arthroplasty: a prospective 2-year study. J Neurosurg Spine 3:417–423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kim SW, Shin JH, Arbatin JJ, Park MS, Chung YK, McAfee PC (2008) Effects of a cervical disc prosthesis on maintaining sagittal alignment of the functional spinal unit and overall sagittal balance of the cervical spine. Eur Spine J 17:20–29

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sasso RC, Smucker JD, Hacker RJ, Heller JG (2007) Artificial disc versus fusion: a prospective, randomized study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients. Spine J 32:2933–2940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Terai H, Suzuki A, Toyoda H et al (2014) Tandem keyhole foraminotomy in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy: retrospective review of 35 cases. J Orthop Surg Res 9:38

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Witzmann A, Hejazi N, Krasznai L (2000) Posterior cervical foraminotomy. A follow-up study of 67 surgically treated patients with compressive radiculopathy. Neurosurg Rev 23:213–217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Jagannatha J, Sherman JH, Szabo T, Shaffrey CI, Jane JA (2009) The posterior cervical foraminotomy in the treatment of cervical disc/osteophyte disease: a single-surgeon experience with a minimum of 5 years’ clinical and radiographic follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 10:347–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Henderson CM, Hennessy RG, Shuey HM Jr, Shackelford EG (1983) Posterior-lateral foraminotomy as an exclusive operative technique for cervical radiculopathy: a review of 846 consecutively operated cases. Neurosurgery 13:504–512

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Williams RW (1983) Microcervical foraminotomy. A surgical alternative for intractable radicular pain. Spine J 8:708–716

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Zeidman SM, Ducker TB (1993) Posterior cervical laminoforaminotomy for radiculopathy: review of 172 cases. Neurosurgery 33:356–362

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Ruetten S, Komp M, Merk H, Godolias G (2008) Full-endoscopic cervical posterior foraminotomy for the operation of lateral disc herniations using 5.9-mm endoscopes: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Spine J 33:940–948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Peloso P, Gross A, Haines T, Trinh K, Goldsmith CH, Aker P (2005) Medicinal and injection therapies for mechanical neck disorders. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2): CD000319

  48. Carette S, Phil M, Fehlings M (2005) Cervical radiculopathy. N Engl J Med 353:392–399

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Carragee EJ, Hurwitz EL, Cheng I et al (2008) Treatment of neck pain: injections and surgical interventions: results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Spine J 33:153–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Abbasi A, Malhotra G, Malanga G, Elovic EP, Kahn S (2007) Complications of interlaminar cervical epidural steroid injections. Spine J 32:2144–2151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Xing D, Ma XL, Ma JX, Wang J, Ma T, Chen Y (2013) A meta-analysis of cervical arthroplasty compared to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for single-level cervical disc disease. J Clin Neurosci 20:970–978

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Coric D, Kim PK, Clemente JD, Boltes MO, Nussbaum M, James S (2013) Prospective randomized study of cervical arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with long-term follow-up: results in 74 patients from a single site. J Neurosurg Spine 18:36–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Sasso RC, Anderson PA, Riew KD, Heller JG (2011) Results of cervical arthroplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: four-year clinical outcomes in a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:1684–1692

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Coric D, Nunley PD, Guyer RD et al (2011) Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kineflex|C artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 15:348–358

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Terai T, Faizan A, Sairyo K, Goel VK (2011) Operated and adjacent segment motions for fusion versus cervical arthroplasty: a pilot study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:682–687

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Cepoiu-Martin M, Faris P, Lorenzetti D, Prefontaine E, Noseworthy T, Sutherland L (2011) Artificial cervical disc arthroplasty: a systematic review. Spine J 36:1623–1633

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the 30 panelists for contributing their opinions. This study received financial support from Major Science and Technology Project of Beijing, and the project's number is D101100049910009.

Conflict of interest

None of the authors has any potential conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedics, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, GongTiNanLu 8#, Chaoyang district, 100020, Beijing, China

    Lei Zang, Ning Fan, Yong Hai, S. B. Lu, Q. J. Su, J. C. Yang, Peng Du & Y. J. Gao

Authors
  1. Lei Zang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ning Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yong Hai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. B. Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Q. J. Su
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. J. C. Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Peng Du
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Y. J. Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yong Hai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zang, L., Fan, N., Hai, Y. et al. Using the modified Delphi method to establish a new Chinese clinical consensus of the treatments for cervical radiculopathy. Eur Spine J 24, 1116–1126 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3856-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3856-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation