29
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Zero-profile implant (Zero-p) versus plate cage benezech implant (PCB) in the treatment of single-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is the golden standard for anterior surgery treating elderly cervical degenerative disease, but the previous implant has some problems such as looseness, translocation, sinking and dysphagia, So Zero-p implant and PCB implant have been developed to decrease the complications.

          Methods

          The clinical data of 57 patients with single level cervical spondylotic myelopathy were retrospectively analyzed. 27 patients adopting Zero-p interbody fusion cage as implant (Zero-p group) and 30 patients adopting integrated plate cage benezech (PCB) as implant (PCB group) from January 2010 to October 2012. Observe whether are differences between the two groups of patients on operation time, intraoperatve blood loss,Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores before and after operation, intervertebral height, cervical physiological curvature, fusion rate, Postoperative dysphagia rate and complications.

          Results

          Zero-p group’s operation time is 98.2 + 15.2 min and its intraoperatve blood loss is 88.2 + 12.9 ml, both of which are lower than those of PCB group (109.8 + 16.9 min,95.2 + 11.6 ml ), so their differences are statistically significant ( P < 0.05). The two groups’ JOA scores 3 months after operation and in the last follow-up are significantly higher than those before operation, so the differences are statistically significant ( P < 0.05). Coob angle 3 months after operation and in the last follow-up improves obviously compared with before operation, so the difference is statistically significant ( P < 0.05). The two groups’ operation segments intervertebral height 3 months after operation and in the last follow-up improves obviously compared with before operation, so the difference is statistically significant ( P < 0.05) Zero-p group has one patient with dysphagia after operation and PCB group has four patients with dysphagia after operation, so there is no statistical differences between the two groups on dysphagia rate ( P > 0.05, P = 0.415). PCB group has two patients with screws backing out and two patients with hoarseness after operation, the two groups’ operation segments all saw bony union in the last follow-up. Zero-p group postoperative complications are lower than PCB group ( P < 0.05, P = 0.044).

          Conclusions

          Zero-profile implant and PCB implant both achieved good clinical effects on the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy, the two groups both saw bony union in operation segments, but Zero-profile implant has the advantages of easy operation, short operation time, less intraoperatve blood loss and less complications.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Donor Site Morbidity After Anterior Iliac Crest Bone Harvest for Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Influence of anterior cervical plate design on Dysphagia: a 2-year prospective longitudinal follow-up study.

            To compare the incidence, prevalence, and rate of improvement of dysphagia in patients undergoing anterior cervical spine surgery with two different anterior instrumentation designs. The study subjects were 156 consecutive patients undergoing anterior cervical spine surgery with plate fixation. We compared the incidence of dysphagia among the two different plate groups both produced by the same manufacturer (Medtronic Danek); the Atlantis plate has thicker and wider plate dimensions than the Zephir plate. Dysphagia evaluations were performed prospectively by telephone interviews at 1, 2, 6, 12, and 24 months following the procedure. Risk factors such as gender, revision surgery, and number of surgical levels were compared between the groups and were not statistically different. Overall incidences of dysphagia were 49%, 37%, 20%, 15.4%, and 11% at 1, 2, 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. Severe and disabling dysphagia is reported to be a relatively uncommon complication of anterior cervical surgery. However, a significant number of patients report mild to moderate discomfort including double-swallowing and catching sensation. Except at the 2-month follow-up point, the Atlantis plate group had higher incidences of dysphagia than the Zephir group at all time points (57% vs 50%, 36% vs 4%, 23% vs 14%, 17% vs 7%, 14% vs 0% at 1, 2, 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively). The Atlantis plate group had a 14% incidence of dysphagia at 2 years compared with the Zephir group, which had a 0% incidence at 2 years (P < 0.04). For primary surgeries, there was a higher incidence of dysphagia at all time points in the Atlantis group when compared with the Zephir group (58% vs 43%, 35% vs 30%, 22% vs 10%, 17% vs 0%, and 13% vs 0% at 1, 2, 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively) (P < 0.04 at 1 year). A regression analysis was performed. The resulting formulas predict the permanent rate of dysphagia for the Atlantis group is 13.6% and for the Zephir group is 3.58%. The use of a smaller and smoother profile plate such as the Zephir does reduce the incidence of dysphagia as compared with a slightly larger and less smooth plate such as the Atlantis.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Is autograft the gold standard in achieving radiographic fusion in one-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with rigid anterior plate fixation?

              A review of 66 consecutive patients at a single institution who underwent one-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with rigid anterior plate fixation with allograft or autograft. To address the efficacy of allograft to autograft with primary respect to fusion rate and secondary attention to risk factors and clinical outcome in patients undergoing one-level ACDF with rigid anterior plate fixation. Although autograft is considered the gold standard in achieving optimal fusion, when compared with allograft in noninstrumented one-level ACDF and in plated and nonplated multilevel ACDF, the efficacy of allograft to autograft in one-level ACDF with rigid anterior plate fixation is not thoroughly understood. Sixty-six consecutive patients (mean age, 45 years) at a single institution who underwent one-level ACDF with rigid anterior plate fixation with allograft (n = 35) or autograft (n = 31) were reviewed for radiographic fusion (mean, 12 months), risk factors, and clinical outcome (mean, 17 months). Smokers entailed 33.3% of the patients, and 45.5% of all patients presented with a work-related injury. An independent blinded observer reviewed at last follow-up lateral neutral and flexion/extension plain radiographs for radiographic fusion and instrumentation integrity. Clinical outcome was assessed on last follow-up and rated according to the Odom criteria. The threshold for statistical significance was established at P 0.05). Three patients developed nonunions (1 smoker; 2 nonsmokers) and entailed Orion instrumentation. In the one patient who was a nonsmoker with a nonunion, slight screw penetration into the involved and uninvolved interbody spaces was noted. No other intraoperative, postoperative, or radiographic complication was noted. All of the nonunions occurred early in the series. Postoperatively, excellent results were reported in 19.7%, good results in 71.2%, and fair results in 9.1% of the patients. Satisfactory clinical outcome was noted in all nonunion patients. A nonstatistically significant difference was noted with regard to clinical outcome of fused and nonfused patients, demographics, and the presence of a work-related injury (P > 0.05). The impact of smoking was not a factor influencing fusion or clinical outcome in this series (P > 0.05). A statistically significant difference was noted in plate-type on fusion rate (P < 0.05). A 100% and 90.3% radiographic fusion rate was obtained for allograft and autograft in one-level ACDF procedures with rigid anterior plate fixation, respectively. Although autograft achieved a higher incidence of nonunion than allograft, this may be attributed to the use of autograft early in the experience of plate application and fixation in this series. The effects of smoking were not found to be a significant factor influencing fusion in these plated patients. In 90.9% of the patients, excellent and good clinical outcome results were reported. The use of allograft in one-level ACDF with rigid plate fixation yields similar and high fusion rates as autograft. The use of allograft bone eliminates complications and pitfalls associated with autologous donor site harvesting. However, the use of autograft is a viable alternative to avoid the risk of infection, disease transmission, and histocompatibility differences associated with allograft. The use of allograft or autograft bone in properly selected patients for one-level ACDF with rigid anterior plate fixation can result in high fusion rates with excellent and good clinical outcomes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                wzhd8612@163.com
                zhuruofu@suda.edu.cn
                86-0512-67780111 , yanghuilinspine@163.com
                jayms5@126.com
                wanggenlin@suda.edu.cn
                85341685@qq.com
                57810096@qq.com
                532029983@qq.com
                Journal
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2474
                12 October 2015
                12 October 2015
                2015
                : 16
                : 290
                Affiliations
                Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, 188 Shizi Street, Suzhou, 215006 China
                Article
                746
                10.1186/s12891-015-0746-4
                4603765
                26459625
                1554381a-9402-4dd9-ae08-53b5e65a276c
                © Wang et al. 2015

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 13 March 2015
                : 2 October 2015
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2015

                Orthopedics
                intervertebral fusion device,spinal fusion,efficacy,internal fixation,cervical spondylotic myelopathy

                Comments

                Comment on this article