基于影像学指标分析Zero-PVA、CP两种融合器在单节段颈椎病患者颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术中的应用价值

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2026.12.018

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To analyze the application value of variable-angle zero-profile interbody fusion cage （Zero-PVA） and titanium plate fusion cage （CP） in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion （ACDF） for single-level cervical spondylosis based on imaging indicators. Methods Clinical data of 204 patients with single-level cervical spondylosis who underwent ACDF in our hospital from January 2021 to September 2025 were retrospectively collected. Based on the type of cage utilized during the surgery， the patients were divided into the Zero-PVA group （n = 101） and the CP group （n = 103）. Perioperative indicators， imaging indicators， Bridwell grades of interbody fusion， Japanese Orthopaedic Association （JOA） scores， Neck Disability Index （NDI）， and complications within 3 months after the operation were compared between the two groups. Results The Zero-PVA group exhibited less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter hospital stay compared to the CP group （P < 0.05）. At 1 week and 3 months post-operation， the cervical lordosis angle， the height of the fusion segment， the Cobb angle of the fusion segment， and the Cobb angle of C_2-7 in both groups increased when compared to the preoperative values （P < 0.05）. At both time points， the Cobb angle of the fusion segment in the Zero-PVA group was larger than that in the CP group （P < 0.05）. At 3 months post-operation， there was a statistically significant difference in the Bridwell grades of interbody fusion between the two groups （P < 0.05）. At 3 months post-operation， the JOA scores increased and the NDI decreased in both groups compared to the preoperative values （P < 0.05）， but no significant differences were found in the JOA scores or NDI between the two groups either before or after the surgery （P > 0.05）. The postoperative complication rate in the Zero-PVA group was lower than that in the CP group （P < 0.05）. Conclusions In ACDF for single-level cervical spondylosis， both Zero-PVA and CP can effectively enhance the cervical function of patients. Nevertheless， Zero-PVA is more effective in minimizing intraoperative trauma， improving the Cobb angle of the fusion segment， facilitating bone fusion， and reducing the risk of postoperative complications.

Key words: cervical spondylosis, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, variable-angle zero-profile interbody fusion cage, titanium plate interbody fusion cage, imaging indicators

CLC Number:

R681.5

Yukun SHEN,Weifeng ZHAO,Bo LI,Zhi PENG,Jingming HE. Analysis of the application value of Zero-PVA versus CP in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for single-level cervical spondylosis based on imaging indicators[J]. The Journal of Practical Medicine, 2026, 42(12): 2223-2229.

Figures/Tables 7

Tab.1

Tab.2

Fig.1

Fig.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Tab.5

References 26

[1]	GUO X， KOU S， YANG B， et al. Efficacy of Daiwenjiu ointment on the treatment of cervical spondylosis with nerve root type caused by cold dampness obstruction［J］. Int J Neurosci， 2025，135（6）：665-672. doi： 10.1080/00207454.2024.2324026 . doi: 10.1080/00207454.2024.2324026
[2]	LI P， LEI R， DING L， et al. Long-term Clinical Outcomes and Optimal Treatment Approaches of Degenerative Cervical Spondylosis： A 12-Year Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study［J］. Spine （Phila Pa 1976）， 2025，50（13）：890-901.doi： 10.1097/BRS.0000000000005266 . doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000005266
[3]	JIANG J， MA J， SU L， et al. Positioning and clinical application of the inflection point of the uncinate process in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion （ACDF）： A retrospective study［J］. Eur Spine J， 2025，34（8）：3314-3325. doi： 10.1007/s00586-025-09071-w . doi: 10.1007/s00586-025-09071-w
[4]	夏毕成，孙建广，黄世磊，等. 零切迹椎间融合器与独立和钛板椎间融合器联合对双节段跳跃型颈椎病的疗效比较［J］. 中华医学杂志，2022，102（19）：1450-1457. doi：10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20220128-00208 . doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20220128-00208
[5]	DERMAN P B， YUSUFBEKOV R， BRAAKSMA B. Device profile of the FlareHawk interbody fusion system， an endplate-conforming multi-planar expandable lumbar interbody fusion cage［J］. Expert Rev Med Devices， 2023，20（5）：357-364. doi： 10.1080/17434440.2023.2198123 . doi: 10.1080/17434440.2023.2198123
[6]	ZHU J， CUI Y， SHEN H， et al. Biomechanical performance of a novel zero-profile interbody cage： A cadaveric study［J］. PLoS One， 2025，20（4）：e0317375. doi： 10.1371/journal.pone. 0317375 . doi: 10.1371/journal.pone. 0317375
[7]	LI X F， JIN L Y， LIANG C G， et al. Adjacent-level biomechanics after single-level anterior cervical interbody fusion with anchored zero-profile spacer versus cage-plate construct： A finite element study［J］. BMC Surg， 2020，20（1）：66. doi： 10.1186/s12893-020-00729-4 . doi: 10.1186/s12893-020-00729-4
[8]	XIE Y， NIE Y， LUNDGREN J， et al. Cervical Spondylosis Diagnosis Based on Convolutional Neural Network with X-ray Images［J］. Sensors （Basel）， 2024，24（11）：3428.doi： 10.3390/s24113428 . doi: 10.3390/s24113428
[9]	SON J I， LEE Y S， KO M J， et al. Effect of Mixture of Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenic Protein-2 and Demineralized Bone Matrix in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion［J］. J Korean Neurosurg Soc， 2024，67（3）：354-363. doi： 10.3340/jkns. 2023.0136 . doi: 10.3340/jkns. 2023.0136
[10]	SHIN D A， LEE S H， OH S， et al. Probabilistic graphical modelling using Bayesian networks for predicting clinical outcome after posterior decompression in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy［J］. Ann Med， 2023，55（1）：2232999. doi： 10.1080/07853890.2023.2232999 . doi: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2232999
[11]	JOHN B， RØE C， BROX J I， et al. Responsiveness and minimal important change of neck disability index and numeric pain rating scale for neck patients in the Norwegian neck and back register［J］. Eur Spine J， 2025，34（6）：2219-2226.doi： 10.1007/s00586-025-08836-7 . doi: 10.1007/s00586-025-08836-7
[12]	HAYASHI T， MURATA S， IWAHASHI H， et al. Efficacy of titanium-coated PEEK cages with two blades in anterior cervical decompression fixation： Bone fusion rates and surgical outcomes［J］. J Orthop Sci， 2025，30（6）：1019-1025. doi： 10.1016/j.jos.2025.03.009 . doi: 10.1016/j.jos.2025.03.009
[13]	NISHIDA N， JIANG F， ASANO T， et al. Effect of posterior decompression with and without fixation on a kyphotic cervical spine with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament［J］. Spinal Cord， 2023，61（2）：133-138. doi： 10.1038/s41393-022-00857-z . doi: 10.1038/s41393-022-00857-z
[14]	BURKHARDT B W， KEROLUS M G， WITIW C D， et al. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with a dynamic translational plating versus a rigid carbon fiber reinforced PEEK plating system-a comparison study of radiographic parameters［J］. Br J Neurosurg， 2024，38（1）：99-103. doi： 10.1080/02688697. 2021. 1976394 . doi: 10.1080/02688697. 2021. 1976394
[15]	SCHOLZ M， SCHLEICHER P， PABST S， et al. A zero-profile anchored spacer in multilevel cervical anterior interbody fusion： Biomechanical comparison to established fixation techniques［J］. Spine （Phila Pa 1976）， 2015，40（7）：E375-E380. doi： 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000768 . doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000768
[16]	ZHANG J， WANG S， TANG X， et al. Clinical and radiological comparison of the zero-profile anchored cage and traditional cage-plate fixation in single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion［J］. Eur J Med Res， 2022，27（1）：189.doi： 10.1186/s40001-022-00813-w . doi: 10.1186/s40001-022-00813-w
[17]	熊礼顺，谭菁华，尹健，等. 零切迹椎间融合器与椎间融合器联合钛板应用于颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术的临床疗效和影像学分析［J］. 实用医学杂志，2024，40（22）：3165-3171. doi：10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2024.22.008 . doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2024.22.008
[18]	WANG A P， SLATER T D， RAFTERY K A， et al. Endplate preparation for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion： Does the amount of endplate removed affect cage subsidence risk［J］. Eur Spine J， 2025，34（8）：3294-3303. doi： 10.1007/s00586-025-08997-5 . doi: 10.1007/s00586-025-08997-5
[19]	刘启彬，吴亚伟，龙科含，等. 单节段颈椎减压融合个性化与成品零切迹融合器比较［J］. 中国矫形外科杂志，2025，33（2）：124-130. doi：10.20184/j.cnki.Issn1005-8478.110075 . doi: 10.20184/j.cnki.Issn1005-8478.110075
[20]	MILLER A K， ZAKKO P， PARK D K， et al. Cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion： An analysis of the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative Database［J］. Spine J， 2024，24（5）：791-799. doi： 10.1016/j.spinee.2023.12.004 . doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2023.12.004
[21]	SINGH L， MULTANI K M， AGRAWAL N. Fusion Free Median Corpectomy-Long-Term Consequence of Foregoing Fusion and Fixation： A Serendipitous Observation［J］. Neurol India， 2024，72（6）：1246-1253.doi： 10.4103/neurol-india.Neurol-India-D-24-00777 . doi: 10.4103/neurol-india.Neurol-India-D-24-00777
[22]	AMBATI V S， MACKI M， CHAN A K， et al. Three-level ACDF versus 3-level laminectomy and fusion： Are there differences in outcomes？ An analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database cervical spondylotic myelopathy cohort［J］. Neurosurg Focus， 2023，55（3）：E2.doi： 10.3171/2023.6.FOCUS23295 . doi: 10.3171/2023.6.FOCUS23295
[23]	PU H Y， WANG J Z， GUO J W， et al. Comparison of Hounsfield Unit Value and Vertebral Bone Quality Score in Predicting Cage Subsidence After Zero-P Fusion Surgery［J］. Orthopedics， 2025，48（6）：e231-e237. doi： 10.3928/01477447-20250827-01 . doi: 10.3928/01477447-20250827-01
[24]	WANG Z， CHEN Q， WANG J， et al. Reduced Forearm Bone Mineral Density Predicts Cage Subsidence After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Cervical Spondylosis［J］. World Neurosurg， 2025，201：124318.doi： 10.1016/j.wneu.2025.124318 . doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2025.124318
[25]	SINGH M， BALMACENO-CRISS M， ANDERSON G， et al. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus cervical disc arthroplasty： An epidemiological review of 433，660 surgical patients from 2011 to 2021［J］. Spine J， 2024，24（8）：1342-1351.doi： 10.1016/j.spinee.2024.02.016 . doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2024.02.016
[26]	MOLFENTER S M， AMIN M R， BALOU M， et al. A scoping review of the methods used to capture dysphagia after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion： The need for a paradigm shift［J］. Eur Spine J， 2023，32（3）：969-976.doi： 10.1007/s00586-022-07515-1 . doi: 10.1007/s00586-022-07515-1

组别	手术时间/min	术中出血量/mL	住院时间/d
Zero-PVA组（n = 101）	46.37 ± 7.40	32.14 ± 8.61	5.94 ± 1.20
CP组（n = 103）	48.19 ± 8.17	38.08 ± 9.33	6.39 ± 1.35
t值	1.667	4.723	2.515
P值	0.097	< 0.001	0.013

组别	颈椎前凸角/°			融合节段高度/mm
组别	术前	术后1周	术后3个月	术前	术后1周	术后3个月
Zero-PVA组（n = 101）	13.40 ± 2.21	18.06 ± 3.54^*	17.15 ± 3.18^*	33.03 ± 4.16	36.82 ± 5.31^*	36.91 ± 5.07^*
CP组（n = 103）	14.36 ± 2.56	17.98 ± 3.63^*	17.03 ± 3.59^*	32.80 ± 3.75	36.95 ± 5.25^*	36.40 ± 5.19^*
F值	F_组间 = 0.502，F_时间 = 169.648，F_{组间·时间} = 0.593			F_组间 = 0.229，F_时间 = 234.157，F_{组间·时间} = 0.214
P值	P_组间 = 0.661，P_时间 < 0.001，P_{组间·时间} = 0.361			P_组间 = 0.846，P_时间 < 0.001，P_{组间·时间} = 0.663
组别	融合节段Cobb角/°			C_2-7Cobb角/°
组别	术前	术后1周	术后3个月	术前	术后1周	术后3个月
Zero-PVA组（n = 101）	4.25 ± 0.28	7.87 ± 1.74^*#	6.72 ± 1.60^*#	11.89 ± 2.85	15.78 ± 3.57^*	15.32 ± 3.60^*
CP组（n = 103）	4.19 ± 0.31	6.05 ± 1.67^*	5.80 ± 1.52^*	12.02 ± 2.96	16.10 ± 3.64^*	16.04 ± 3.22^*
F值	F_组间 = 68.339，F_时间 = 267.641，F_{组间·时间} = 5.637			F_组间 = 0.502，F_时间 = 169.648，F_{组间·时间} = 0.593
P值	P_组间 < 0.001，P_时间 < 0.001，P_{组间·时间} < 0.001			P_组间 = 0.661，P_时间 < 0.001，P_{组间·时间} = 0.361

组别	Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级	Ⅲ级	Ⅳ级
Zero-PVA组（n = 101）	78（77.23）	22（21.78）	1（0.99）	0（0.00）
CP组（n = 103）	52（50.49）	42（40.78）	9（8.74）	0（0.00）
Z值	17.097
P值	< 0.001

组别	JOA评分		NDI
组别	术前	术后3个月	术前	术后3个月
Zero-PVA组（n = 101）	9.36 ± 2.60	13.37 ± 1.85^*	54.17 ± 14.63	22.69 ± 5.03^*
CP组（n = 103）	8.78 ± 2.49	13.01 ± 1.57^*	52.89 ± 15.01	23.24 ± 7.20^*
t值	1.627	1.500	0.617	0.631
P值	0.105	0.135	0.538	0.529

组别	融合器沉降	邻近节段退变	吞咽困难	合计
Zero-PVA组（n = 101）	0（0.00）	2（1.98）	1（0.99）	3（2.97）
CP组（n = 103）	5（4.85）	4（3.88）	2（1.94）	11（10.68）
χ² 值				4.742
P值				0.029

Analysis of the application value of Zero-PVA versus CP in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for single-level cervical spondylosis based on imaging indicators

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 26

Related Articles 5

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	Hanli YANG,Chunzhi LIU,Ming SHI,Minggao HU,Xianzhong BU,Yuanming ZHONG,Wei. XU. Mechanism of Jisuishang Formula in cervical spondylotic myelopathy： Regulation of neuronal injury via the Wnt/β⁃catenin signaling pathway [J]. The Journal of Practical Medicine, 2025, 41(10): 1487-1495.
[2]	Lishun XIONG,Jinghua TAN,Jian YIN,Yiguo. YAN. Clinical efficacy and imaging analysis of zero⁃profile interbody fusion cage versus interbody fusion cage combined with titanium plate in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion [J]. The Journal of Practical Medicine, 2024, 40(22): 3165-3171.
[3]	Wenjuan TANG,Huanhuan JIA,Yaonan DU,Meirong WU. Analysis of the functional improvement effect of acupuncture with the three yang meridians of the hand as the main acupuncture， governor vessel moxibustion， and translucent medicine moxibustion therapy on cervical spondylosis of wind⁃cold obstruction type [J]. The Journal of Practical Medicine, 2024, 40(12): 1744-1748.
[4]	LAI Chunbai, LI Shiliang, ZHONG Yuehai, LIU Cuiqing, MIAO Zuoxiong. . Clinical study on the treatment of cervical spondylosis of vertebral artery type with functional exercise of respiratory mode reconstruction combined with ginger separated moxibustion [J]. The Journal of Practical Medicine, 2023, 39(11): 1451-1456.
[5]	LIU Shaolin, XU Yusheng, LI Xingchen, HUANG Honghan, LIU Yunxuan, MIAO Jinhong, XU Yuanzhi.. Medium and long ⁃ term curative effect of posterior percutaneous endoscopic cervical discectomy in treat⁃ ment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy [J]. The Journal of Practical Medicine, 2021, 37(20): 2624-2629.