Abstract:

Objective Compare and analyze the clinical efficacy and imaging differences of zero?profile interbody fusion cage and interbody fusion cage combined with titanium plate in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion （ACDF）. Methods The clinical data of 40 patients who underwent ACDF in our hospital from February 2017 to November 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them， 22 patients were treated with zero?profile interbody fusion cage （zero?profile group）， and 18 patients were treated with interbody fusion cage combined with titanium plate （titanium plate group）. Record the operation time and intraoperative blood loss of the two groups. Japanese Orthopaedic Association （JOA） score， neck disability index （NDI） score and postoperative dysphagia were used to evaluate the clinical efficacy. Measure the cervical Cobb angle （C2?C7）， fusion segment Cobb angle， average intervertebral space height， and fusion segment height. Evaluate the fusion and subsidence of the cage by observing the internal and external bone bridging of the cage through postoperative CT. Results There was no significant difference in operation time and intraoperative blood loss between the two groups （P > 0.05）. The JOA score， NDI score， average intervertebral space height， and fusion segment height of the two groups after operation were significantly improved compared with those before operation （P < 0.05）. The incidence of postoperative dysphagia in the zero?profile group was significantly lower than that in the titanium plate group （P < 0.05）. The Cobb angle of the fusion segment in the zero?profile group at 3 months after operation was significantly improved compared with that before operation （P < 0.05）. There was no significant difference in the other radiographic parameters between the two groups at each follow?up time point （P > 0.05）， except for the Cobb angle of the fusion segment at 3 months after operation and at the last follow?up （P < 0.05） and the difference in the extra?fusion bone bridge （ExGBB） between the two groups at the last follow?up （P < 0.05）. Conclusions In ACDF， the clinical efficacy of zero?profile interbody fusion cage and interbody fusion cage combined with titanium plate is similar， both of which can significantly improve cervical function and postoperative imaging indicators. However， the zero?profile interbody fusion cage significantly reduced the incidence of dysphagia compared with the interbody fusion cage combined with titanium plate. In the end?stage follow?up， the former is better than the latter in improving the Cobb angle of the fusion segment and ExGBB， which is more conducive to promoting bone graft fusion. Both fuses have the risk of sinking.

Key words: zero-profile interbody fusion cage, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion （ACDF）, cervical spondylosis, interbody fusion cage, titanium plate