1. Heller JG, Sasso RC, Papadopoulos SM, et al. Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009 34:101–7.
2. Tu TH, Wu JC, Huang WC, et al. Heterotopic ossification after cervical total disc replacement: determination by CT and effects on clinical outcomes. J Neurosurg Spine 2011 14:457–65.
4. Yi S, Shin DA, Kim KN, et al. The predisposing factors for the heterotopic ossification after cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine J 2013 13:1048–54.
6. Tu TH, Wu JC, Huang WC, et al. Postoperative nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and the prevention of heterotopic ossification after cervical arthroplasty: analysis using CT and a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 2015 22:447–53.
7. Chalmers J, Gray DH, Rush J. Observations on the induction of bone in soft tissues. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1975 57:36–45.
8. Phan K, Tian DH, Cao C, Black D, Yan TD. Systematic review and meta-analysis: techniques and a guide for the academic surgeon. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 2015 4:112–22.
9. Phan K, Mobbs RJ. Systematic reviews and metaanalyses in spine surgery, neurosurgery and orthopedics: guidelines for the surgeon scientist. J Spine Surg 2015 1:19–27.
11. Dmitriev AE, Cunningham BW, Hu N, Sell G, Vigna F, McAfee PC. Adjacent level intradiscal pressure and segmental kinematics following a cervical total disc arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005 30:1165–72.
12. Tu TH, Wu JC, Huang WC, Wu CL, Ko CC, Cheng H. The effects of carpentry on heterotopic ossification and mobility in cervical arthroplasty: determination by computed tomography with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2012 16:601–9.
15. Zeng J, Liu H, Wang B, et al. Clinical and radiographic comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty with Prestige-LP Disc and anterior cervical fusion: a minimum 6-year follow-up study. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2018 164:97–102.
16. Kim KS, Heo DH. Do postoperative biomechanical changes induce heterotopic ossification after cervical arthroplasty?: a 5-year follow-up study. Clin Spine Surg 2016 29:E309–13.
19. Malham GM, Parker RM, Ellis NJ, Chan PG, Varma D. Cervical artificial disc replacement with ProDiscC: clinical and radiographic outcomes with long-term follow-up. J Clin Neurosci 2014 21:949–53.
21. Pimenta L, Oliveira L, Coutinho E, Marchi L. Bone formation in cervical total disk replacement (CTDR) up to the 6-year follow-up: experience from 272 levels. Neurosurg Q 2013 23:1–6.
23. Pickett GE, Sekhon LH, Sears WR, Duggal N. Complications with cervical arthroplasty. J Neurosurg Spine 2006 4:98–105.
25. Wenger M, Hoonacker Pv, Zachee B, Lange R, Markwalder TM. Bryan cervical disc prostheses: preservation of function over time. J Clin Neurosci 2009 16:220–5.
26. Anderst WJ, Donaldson WF 3rd, Lee JY, Kang JD. Continuous cervical spine kinematics during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension. Spine J 2014 14:1221–7.
27. Pickett GE, Mitsis DK, Sekhon LH, Sears WR, Duggal N. Effects of a cervical disc prosthesis on segmental and cervical spine alignment. Neurosurg Focus 2004 17:E5.
29. Johnson JP, Lauryssen C, Cambron HO, et al. Sagittal alignment and the Bryan cervical artificial disc. Neurosurg Focus 2004 17:E14.
30. Ahn PG, Kim KN, Moon SW, Kim KS. Changes in cervical range of motion and sagittal alignment in early and late phases after total disc replacement: radiographic follow-up exceeding 2 years. J Neurosurg Spine 2009 11:688–95.
31. Anakwenze OA, Auerbach JD, Milby AH, Lonner BS, Balderston RA. Sagittal cervical alignment after cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: results of a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009 34:2001–7.
32. Rabin D, Bertagnoli R, Wharton N, Pickett GE, Duggal N. Sagittal balance influences range of motion: an in vivo study with the ProDisc-C. Spine J 2009 9:128–33.
33. DiAngelo DJ, Foley KT, Morrow BR, et al. In vitro biomechanics of cervical disc arthroplasty with the ProDisc-C total disc implant. Neurosurg Focus 2004 17:E7.
34. Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Pfeiffer F, et al. Early results after ProDisc-C cervical disc replacement. J Neurosurg Spine 2005 2:403–10.
35. Lazaro BC, Yucesoy K, Yuksel KZ, et al. Effect of arthroplasty design on cervical spine kinematics: analysis of the Bryan disc, ProDisc-C, and Synergy disc. Neurosurg Focus 2010 28:E6.
37. Rousseau MA, Cottin P, Levante S, Nogier A, Lazennec JY, Skalli W. In vivo kinematics of two types of ball-and-socket cervical disc replacements in the sagittal plane: cranial versus caudal geometric center. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2008 33:E6–9.
38. Dvorak J, Panjabi MM, Novotny JE, Antinnes JA. In vivo flexion/extension of the normal cervical spine. J Orthop Res 1991 9:828–34.
39. Galbusera F, Bellini CM, Brayda-Bruno M, Fornari M. Biomechanical studies on cervical total disc arthroplasty: a literature review. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2008 23:1095–104.
40. Wachowski MM, Wagner M, Weiland J, et al. Does total disc arthroplasty in C3/C4-segments change the kinematic features of axial rotation? J Biomech 2013 46:1739–45.
41. Chang PY, Chang HK, Wu JC, et al. Differences between C3-4 and other subaxial levels of cervical disc arthroplasty: more heterotopic ossification at the 5-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 2016 24:752–9.
42. Yi S, Oh J, Choi G, et al. The fate of heterotopic ossification associated with cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2014 39:2078–83.
44. Hui N, Phan K, Kerferd J, Lee M, Mobbs RJ. Prevalence of and risk factors for heterotopic ossification after cervical total disc replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Global Spine J 2020 10:790–804.
45. Cardoso MJ, Rosner MK. Multilevel cervical arthroplasty with artificial disc replacement. Neurosurg Focus 2010 28:E19.
46. Pimenta L, McAfee PC, Cappuccino A, Bellera FP, Link HD. Clinical experience with the new artificial cervical PCM (Cervitech) disc. Spine J 2004 4(6 Suppl): 315S–321S.
47. Amit A, Dorward N. Bryan cervical disc prosthesis: 12-month clinical outcome. Br J Neurosurg 2007 21:478–84.
48. Du J, Li M, Liu H, Meng H, He Q, Luo Z. Early follow-up outcomes after treatment of degenerative disc disease with the discover cervical disc prosthesis. Spine J 2011 11:281–9.
49. Cardoso MJ, Mendelsohn A, Rosner MK. Cervical hybrid arthroplasty with 2 unique fusion techniques. J Neurosurg Spine 2011 15:48–54.
51. Zarkadis NJ, Cleveland AW, Kusnezov NA, Dunn JC, Caram PM, Herzog JP. Outcomes following multilevel cervical disc arthroplasty in the young active population. Mil Med 2017 182:e1790–4.
53. Wang Q, Cheng H, Mao Z, Qi X, Zhang M, Chen Y. Clinical and radiographic results after treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease with the bryan disc prosthesis: a prospective study with 2-year follow-up. Acta Orthop Belg 2011 77:809–15.
54. Cheng L, Nie L, Zhang L, Hou Y. Fusion versus Bryan cervical disc in two-level cervical disc disease: a prospective, randomised study. Int Orthop 2009 33:1347–51.
57. Bhadra AK, Raman AS, Casey AT, Crawford RJ. Single-level cervical radiculopathy: clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of four techniques of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion and disc arthroplasty. Eur Spine J 2009 18:232–7.
58. Wu TK, Wang BY, Cheng D, et al. Clinical and radiographic features of hybrid surgery for the treatment of skip-level cervical degenerative disc disease: a minimum 24-month follow-up. J Clin Neurosci 2017 40:102–8.
59. Wu T, Wang B, Ding C, et al. Artificial cervical disc replacement with the Prestige-LP prosthesis for the treatment of non-contiguous 2-level cervical degenerative disc disease: a minimum 24-month follow-up. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2017 152:57–62.
60. Qizhi S, Lei S, Peijia L, et al. A comparison of zeroprofile devices and artificial cervical disks in patients with 2 noncontiguous levels of cervical spondylosis. Clin Spine Surg 2016 29:E61–6.
61. Ding F, Jia Z, Wu Y, Li C, He Q, Ruan D. Fusionnonfusion hybrid construct versus anterior cervical hybrid decompression and fusion: a comparative study for 3-level cervical degenerative disc diseases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2014 39:1934–42.
62. Peng CW, Yue WM, Basit A, et al. Intermediate results of the prestige LP cervical disc replacement: clinical and radiological analysis with minimum twoyear follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011 36:E105–11.
63. Yi S, Kim KN, Yang MS, et al. Difference in occurrence of heterotopic ossification according to prosthesis type in the cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010 35:1556–61.
66. Tian W, Yan K, Han X, Yu J, Jin P, Han X. Comparison of the clinical and radiographic results between cervical artificial disk replacement and anterior cervical fusion: a 6-year prospective nonrandomized comparative study. Clin Spine Surg 2017 30:E578–86.
71. Miao J, Yu F, Shen Y, et al. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc replacement with a new prosthesis. Spine J 2014 14:878–83.
72. Chang HK, Chang CC, Tu TH, et al. Can segmental mobility be increased by cervical arthroplasty? Neurosurg Focus 2017 42:E3.
73. Lee JH, Jung TG, Kim HS, Jang JS, Lee SH. Analysis of the incidence and clinical effect of the heterotopic ossification in a single-level cervical artificial disc replacement. Spine J 2010 10:676–82.
75. Yang H, Lu X, Yuan W, Wang X, Chen D, Zhao D. Artificial disk replacement in the treatment of degenerative cervical disk disorder: a 30-year follow-up study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2014 39:1564–71.
78. Phillips FM, Geisler FH, Gilder KM, Reah C, Howell KM, McAfee PC. Long-term outcomes of the US FDA IDE prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015 40:674–83.
79. Shichang L, Yueming S, Limin L, et al. Clinical and radiologic comparison of dynamic cervical implant arthroplasty and cervical total disc replacement for single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. J Clin Neurosci 2016 27:102–9.
80. Bin S, Xiangwang H, Sheng X, et al. Artificial cervical disk replacement for the treatment of adjacent segment disease after anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Clin Spine Surg 2017 30:E587–91.
81. Radcliff KE, Davis RJ, Hoffman GA, et al. Sevenyear clinical results of cervical total disc replacement compared with anterior discectomy and fusion for treatment of two-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter FDA clinical trial. Spine J 2016 16:S204.
83. Coric D, Guyer RD, Nunley PD, et al. Prospective, randomized multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: 5-year results with a metal-on-metal artificial disc. J Neurosurg Spine 2018 28:252–61.
85. Meisel HJ, Jurak L, Antinheimo J, et al. Four-year results of a prospective single-arm study on 200 semi-constrained total cervical disc prostheses: clinical and radiographic outcome. J Neurosurg Spine 2016 25:556–65.
86. Zhao Y, Zhang Y, Sun Y, Pan S, Zhou F, Liu Z. Application of cervical arthroplasty with Bryan cervical disc: 10-year follow-up results in China. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016 41:111–5.
88. Zhou HH, Qu Y, Dong RP, Kang MY, Zhao JW. Does heterotopic ossification affect the outcomes of cervical total disc replacement?: a meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015 40:E332–40.