J Korean Soc Spine Surg. 2016 Sep;23(3):146-153. Korean.
Published online Sep 30, 2016.
© Copyright 2016 Korean Society of Spine Surgery
Original Article

Anterior Cervical Fusion Using a Zero-Profile Stand-Alone Cage: Radiological and Clinical Outcomes after More than 2 Years of Follow-Up

Han Chang, M.D. and Byung-Wan Choi, M.D.*
    • Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Busan Korea Hospital, Busan, Korea.
    • *Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Inje University, Haeundae Paik Hospital, Busan, Korea.
Received September 21, 2015; Revised October 07, 2015; Accepted April 26, 2016.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Study Design

Retrospective analysis.

Objectives

To analyze the usefulness of Zero-P® by analyzing the radiological and clinical outcomes with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up.

Summary of Literature Review

Anterior discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using Zero-P® showed excellent results. However, there is a lack of studies focusing on long-term outcomes.

Materials and Methods

Ninety-eight patients who underwent single-level ACDF using Zero-P® with more than 2 years of follow-up were included for analysis. In the radiological analysis, we evaluated disc height, segmental lordosis, and subsidence in the preoperative, postoperative, and last follow-up periods. The Neck Disability Index (NDI), Neck Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and Arm VAS were also evaluated for clinical assessment. Radiological bony fusion was assessed, and radiological and clinical differences according to bony fusion were evaluated.

Results

Intervertebral disc height had increased 2.92 mm after surgery and subsided to 2.36 mm at the final follow-up. Subsidence of the screw was 0.58 mm at final follow-up. Segmental lordosis was 3.97° at the preoperative assessment, 8.39° in the postoperative follow-up, and 5.83° in the last follow-up. The Neck VAS score was 4.47, 2.28, and 1.27, respectively. The Arm VAS score was 5.73, 3.13, and 2.18; and NDI score was 17.8, 11.7, and 7.89, respectively. There was no association between the radiological and clinical results. Radiological nonunion was found in 18 subjects. There were no significant differences in radiological and clinical parameters according to bony union.

Conclusions

ACDF with Zero-P® for treatment of degenerative cervical disease showed subsidence in 55.1% and nonunion in 18% of cases. However, the radiological results were not related to the clinical results.

Keywords
Cervical spine; Anterior fusion; Zero-P®; Subsidence; Nonunion

Figures

Fig. 1
(A) Measurement of intervertebral distance (A) and Cobb angle (B), (B) Subsidence of the cage screw was measured by analyzing change in distance (d) between the tip of the screws A and posterior margin of the vertebral body.

Tables

Table 1
Correlation between radiological finding and clinical outcomes

Table 2
Comparison of the demographic, radiololocal, and clinical outcomes according to subsidence

Table 3
Comparison of the demographic, radiololocal, and clinical outcomes according to bony union

Table 4
Summary of the studies on cage subsidence and union

References

    1. Bohlman HH, Emery SE, Goodfellow DB, et al. Robinson anterior cervical discectomy and arthrodesis for cervical radiculopathy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993;75:1298–1307.
    1. Smith GW, Robinson RA. The treatment of certain cervical-spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1958;40:607–624.
    1. Banwart JC, Asher MA, Hassanein RS. Iliac crest bone graft harvest donor site morbidity: a statistical evaluation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995;20:1055–1060.
    1. Silber JS, Anderson DG, Daffner SD, et al. Donor site morbidity after anterior iliac crest bone harvest for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003;28:134–139.
    1. Siddiqui AA, Jackowski A. Cage versus tricortical graft for cervical interbody fusion: a prospective randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003;85:1019–1025.
    1. Vavruch L, Hedlund R, Javid D, et al. A prospective randomized comparison between the cloward procedure and a carbon fiber cage in the cervical spine: a clinical and radiologic study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002;27:1694–1701.
    1. Kast E, Derakhshani S, Bothmann M, et al. Subsidence after anterior cervical inter-body fusion: a randomized prospective clinical trial. Neurosurg Rev 2009;32:207–214.
    1. Kandziora F, Pflugmacher R, Schafer J, et al. Biomechanical comparison of cervical spine interbody fusion cages. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001;26:1850–1857.
    1. Bartels RH, Donk RD, Feuth T. Subsidence of stand-alone cervical carbon fiber cages. Neurosurgery 2006;58:502–508.
    1. Song KJ, Taghavi CE, Lee KB, et al. The efficacy of plate construct augmentation versus cage alone in anterior cervical fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:2886–2892.
    1. Yue WM, Brodner W, Highland TR. Persistent swallowing and voice problems after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with allograft and plating: a 5- to 11-year follow-up study. Eur Spine J 2005;14:677–682.
    1. Hofstetter CP, Kesavabhotla K, Boockvar JA. Zero-profile Anchored Spacer Reduces Rate of Dysphagia Compared to ACDF With Anterior Plating. J Spinal Disord Tech 2015;28:E284–E290.
    1. Park JB, Cho YS, Riew KD. Development of adjacent-level ossification in patients with an anterior cervical plate. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005;87:558–563.
    1. Wang ZD, Zhu RF, Wang ZD, et al. The application of a zero-profile implant in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. J Clin Neurosci 2014;21:462–466.
    1. Qi M, Chen H, Liu Y, et al. The use of a zero-profile device compared with an anterior plate and cage in the treatment of patients with symptomatic cervical spondylosis: A preliminary clinical investigation. Bone Joint J 2013;95:543–547.
    1. Vanek P, Bradac O, Delacy P, et al. Anterior interbody fusion of the cervical spine with Zero-P spacer: prospective comparative study-clinical and radiological results at a minimum 2 years after surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38:E792–E797.
    1. Dong J, Lu M, Lu T, et al. Meta-Analysis Comparing Zero-Profile Spacer and Anterior Plate in Anterior Cervical Fusion. PLoS One 2015 Jun;10(6):e0130223.
    1. Henriksen M, Lund H, Moe-Nilssen R, et al. Test-retest reliability of trunk accelerometric gait analysis. Gait Posture 2004;19:288.
    1. Kandziora F, Pflugmacher R, Scholz M, et al. Treatment of traumatic cervical spine instability with interbody fusion cages: a prospective controlled study with a 2-year followup. Injury 2005;36 Suppl:27–35.
    1. Barsa P, Suchomel P. Factors affecting sagittal malalignment due to cage subsidence in standalone cage assisted anterior cervical fusion. Eur Spine J 2007;16:1395–1400.
    1. Song KJ, Lee KB. A preliminary study of the use of cage and plating for single-segment fusion in degenerative cervical spine disease. J Clin Neurosci 2006;13:181–187.
    1. Song KJ, Taghavi CE, Lee KB, Song JH, Eun JP. The efficacy of plate construct augmentation versus cage alone in anterior cervical fusion. Spine 2009;34:2886–2892.
    1. Gercek E, Arlet V, Delisle J, et al. Subsidence of stand-alone cervical cages in anterior interbody fusion: warning. Eur Spine J 2003;12:513–516.
    1. van Jonbergen HP, Spruit M, Anderson PG, et al. Anterior cervical interbody fusion with a titanium box cage: early radiological assessment of fusion and subsidence. Spine J 2005;5:645–649.
    1. Kulkarni AG, Hee HT, Wong HK. Solis cage (PEEK) for anterior cervical fusion: preliminary radiological results with emphasis on fusion and subsidence. Spine J 2007;7:205–209.
    1. Yang JJ, Yu CH, Chang BS, et al. Subsidence and nonunion after anterior cervical interbody fusion using a standalone polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage. Clin Orthop Surg 2011;3:16–23.
    1. Bartels RH, Donk R, van Azn RD. Height of cervical foramina after anterior discectomy and implantation of a carbon fiber cage. J Neurosurg 2001;95 1 Suppl:40–42.
    1. Katsuura A, Hukuda S, Saruhashi Y, et al. Kyphotic malalignment after anterior cervical fusion is one of the factors promoting the degenerative process in adjacent intervertebral levels. Eur Spine J 2001;10:320–324.
    1. Wu WJ, Jiang LS, Liang Y, et al. Cage subsidence does not, but cervical lordosis improvement does affect the longterm results of anterior cervical fusion with stand-alone cage for degenerative cervical disc disease: a retrospective study. Eur Spine J 2012;21:1374–1382.
    1. Scholz M, Reyes PM, Schleicher P, et al. A new stand-alone cervical anterior interbody fusion device: biomechanical comparison with established anterior cervical fixation devices. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:156–160.
    1. An HS, Evanich CJ, Nowicki BH, Haughton VM. Ideal thickness of Smith-Robinson graft for anterior cervical fusion. A cadaveric study with computed tomographic correlation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993;18:2043–2047.
    1. Lee SH, Suk KS, Kim KT, Lee JH, Seo EM, Im YS. Outcome analysis of single level anterior cervical fusion using interbody PEEK cage with autologous iliac bone graft. J Korean Orthop Assoc 2009;44:93–101.

Metrics
Share
Figures

1 / 1

Tables

1 / 4

PERMALINK