A Zero-profile device is a cervical stand-alone cage with integrated segmental fixation device. We characteristically evaluated the radiological changes as well as clinical outcomes in the application of Zero-profile devices compared with stand-alone cages and anterior cervical plates with iliac bone grafts for the cervical disease.
Retrospectively, total 60 patients at least more than one year follow-up were enrolled. Twenty patients were treated with Zero-profile devices (Group A), twenty patients with stand-alone cages (Group B) and twenty patients with anterior cervical plates and iliac bone grafts (Group C) for a single level cervical disease. The clinical outcomes were evaluated by Odom's criteria and Bazaz-Yoo dysphagia index. The radiologic parameters were by subsidence and the changes of the midpoint interbody height (IBH), the segmental kyphotic angle (SKA), the overall kyphotic angle (OKA) in index level.
Although there was no significant clinical difference according to the Odom's criteria among them(p=0.766), post-operative dysphagia was significantly decreased in the Group A and B compared with the Group C (p=0.04). From the immediate postoperative to the last follow-up time, the mean change of IBH decrement and SKA increment were significant in the Group B compared with the Group A (p=0.025, p=0.033) and the Group C (p=0.001, p=0.000). The subsidence rate was not significant among all groups (p=0.338).
This Zero-profile device is a valuable alternative to the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with a low incidence of postoperative dysphagia and without segmental kyphotic change.
Smith and Robinson's technique had been the "gold standard" for the surgical treatment of cervical disc disease
postoperative chronic iliac pain
Many authors reported that the clinical outcomes between the stand-alone cages and the anterior cervical plates for cervical disc disease were similar
In addition, there is no direct comparative research about clinical and radiological outcomes among three groups, as far as we know: Zero-profile devices, stand-alone cages, and anterior cervical plates with iliac bone grafts for the cervical disease. Here, we wrote this paper to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes among them.
Retrospectively, we evaluated total sixty patients treated with a single level ACDF from January 2008 to June 2013 in a retrograde order. The demographic findings of the patients were summarized (
The inclusion criteria were; (1) signs and symptoms of cervical radiculopathy or cervical spondylotic myelopathy which was unresponsive to the conservative treatment, (2) single level disease confirmed by clinical symptom and imaging (Computed tomography scan or Magnetic resonance imaging), (3) complete continuous clinical and imaging data. The exclusion criteria were; (1) history of previous cervical spine surgery, (2) others cervical diseases, including infection, tumor, deformity or ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament, (3) requirement for simultaneous anterior and posterior surgery, or hybrid surgery.
All operative procedures were performed by one neurosurgeon. A standard anterior Smith approach was performed. After removing the disc material, the cartilage endplates were scraped with a curette and high speed electric drill. The posterior osteophytes were removed by Kerrison punches. Once neural decompression was performed, the height, length and depth were measured of the discectomy level. For fusion bed, milling procedure was performed with diamond drill. The patients were reconstructed with three different methods.
In the Group A, the interbody fusion was performed with Zero-profile devices with four screws were tightened into the adjacent cervical bony segment (
Clinical outcome was evaluated according to the Odom's criteria. These criteria provide the healthy status and daily activities limitations. Patients were rated as excellent, good, fair and poor. Excellent state is all preoperative symptoms relieved and abnormal findings improved; Good state is minimal persistence of preoperative symptoms; Fair state is definite relief of some preoperative symptoms, but other symptoms unchanged or slightly improved; Poor state is symptoms and signs unchanged or exacerbated. Furthermore, postoperative dysphagia and chronic donor site pain were observed.
Incidence of dysphagia-related symptom was recorded using the system defined by Bazaz
Three radiographic parameters were estimated at the preoperative, the immediate postoperative and the last follow-up time (range: 12-15 months), finally. The lateral plain radiographs of the cervical spine were used for the measurement of the midpoint interbody height (IBH), the segmental kyphotic angle (SKA) and the overall kyphotic angle (OKA) in index level.
The IBH is defined as the distance between the midpoint of the superior end plate of upper vertebra and inferior end plate of lower vertebra of the affected segments. The SKA (α) is defined as the angle between the superior end plate of the upper vertebra and the inferior end plate of the lower vertebra of the affected segment. The OKA (β) is defined as the angle between the inferior endplate of C2 and the inferior endplate of C7 (
Postoperative subsidence was defined as any settlement in the disc height of at least 3 mm on the lateral radiographs
Statistical analysis was achieved using SPSS for Mac (version 20.0, SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). Clinical and Radiological interval changes of subgroups were analyzed using the ANOVA test, Chi-Square test, Mann-Whitney U-test and Wilcoxon signed rank test. The statistical significance was defined as p<0.05.
Postoperatively, the majority of patients of all groups were good or excellent according to the Odom's criteria. There was no significant difference among them(p=0.766) (
One (5.0%) patient complained of mild dysphagia 2 weeks after surgery in the Group A and B, however, the dysphagia disappeared after 2 months. There were six (30%) patients complained of dysphagia in the Group C. Four patients complained of mild dysphagia 2 weeks after surgery. Two patients complained of moderate dysphagia 2 months after surgery. After conservative treatment, such as oromotor fascilitation and feeding training, five patients had recovered after 2 months and one patient recovered after 6 months. The incidence of dysphagia of Group A and B was lower than Group C (p= 0.040) (
In the Zero-profile devices group, the immediate postoperative IBH was increased compared with the preoperative time and then decreased at the last follow-up time (p=0.000, p=0.000), respectively. However, the mean IBH was increased from the preoperative to the last follow-up time (p=0.000). The immediate postoperative SKA was decreased compared with the preoperative time and then increased at the time of the last follow-up (p=0.001, p=0.000), respectively. However, the mean SKA was decreased from the preoperative to the last follow-up time (p=0.000). There were no significant interval changes of OKA as time goes on (
In the stand-alone cages group, the immediate postoperative IBH was increased compared with preoperative time and then decreased at the last follow-up time (p=0.000, p=0.000), respectively. However, the mean IBH was decreased from the preoperative to the last follow-up time (p=0.000). The immediate postoperative SKA was decreased compared with the preoperative time and then increased at the time of the last follow-up (p=0.004, p=0.007), respectively. However, the mean SKA was increased from the preoperative to the last follow-up time (p=0.011). There were no significant changes of OKA in process of time (
In the anterior cervical plates with autologous iliac bone graft group, the immediate postoperative IBH was increased compared with the preoperative time and then decreased at the last follow-up time (p=0.000, p=0.000), respectively. However, the mean IBH was somewhat decreased from the preoperative to the last follow-up time (p=0.000). The immediate postoperative SKA was decreased compared with the preoperative time and then somewhat increased at the time of the last follow-up (p=0.001, p=0.000), respectively. However, the mean SKA was decreased from the preoperative to the last follow-OKA as time as time goes by(
The change of IBH showed significantly more decreased in the Group B than the Group A from the immediate postoperative to the last follow-up time and from the preoperative to the last follow-up time (p=0.025, p=0.000), respectively. The change of SKA showed significantly more increased in the Group B than the Group A from the immediate postoperative to the last follow-up time and from the preoperative to the last follow up time (p=0.033, p=0.025), respectively. The change of OKA showed significantly more increased in the Group B than the Group A from the preoperative to the last follow-up time (p=0.044) (
The change of IBH was significantly more decreased in the Group C than the Group B from the preoperative to the immediate postoperative time (p=0.036). However, it was significantly more decreased in the Group B than the Group C from the immediate postoperative to the last follow-up time (p=0.001).
The change of SKA showed significantly more increased in the Group B than the Group C from the immediate postoperative to the last follow-up time and from the preoperative to the last follow-up time (p=0.000, p=0.006), respectively. However, there was no significant difference of OKA between them(
The change of IBH was significantly more increased in the Group A than the Group C from the preoperative to the immediate postoperative time and from the preoperative to the last follow-up time (p=0.001, p=0.004), respectively. However, there was no significant difference of SKA and OKA between them (
The highest incidence of subsidence was in the Group B. However, there was no statistical significance among them in this study (p=0.338) (
Degenerative conditions of the cervical disease are commonly treated by discectomy and subsequent interbody fusion. ACDF is the gold standard for the surgical management at the present. Although the cervical total arthroplasty is possible operative techniques
Various types of cages have been used to perform ACDF, including titanium, carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP), and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages. The radiolucent PEEK cages have superior biomechanical properties and a similar elastic coefficient to that of human bone, as well as a reduced stress shielding effect, which reduces the bone weakness and increases the fusion rate. However, graft extrusion was reported as 2% on the average. In our study, there was no graft extrusion, nor screw loosening.
Generally, anterior cervical plates using various interbody grafts enhance stabilizing properties and increase fusionrates
Meanwhile, the cervical stand-alone cage with integrated fixation for the Zero-profile segmental fixation devices has four screws for internal screw fixation and a one-step locking mechanism. This device is made of radiolucent PEEK polymer and has a radio-opaque titanium alloy plate to verify placement. This Zero-profile device acts as a stand-alone device for use in cervical interbody fusion
Many authors reported that the clinical outcomes between the stand-alone cage and the anterior cervical plate for cervical disc disease were similar
In ACDF, a common complication is chronic dysphagia with a general incidence of around 3-21% before the Zeroprofile devices era
Although the exact pathophysiologic mechanism of dysphagia after ACDF remains unknown, Lee et al.
This study showed that the dysphagia incidence of Group A and Group B was 5%, respectively, while that of Group C was 20% in the early postoperative period and 10% in the medium period (
After conservative treatment, five patients had recovered after 2 months and one patient recovered after 5 months. Our dysphagia incidence was consistent with other studies
On the other hand, the radiologic change of IBH and SKA of all groups had similar pattern as time passes. That is, the immediate postoperative IBH was increased from the preoperative time and then decreased at the time of the last follow-up (p=0.000 and p=0.000 in Group A, B and C), and the immediate postoperative SKA was decreased from the preoperative time and then increased at the time of the last follow-up (p=0.001 and p=0.000 in the Group A, p=0.004 and p=0.007 in Group B, p=0.001 and p=0.000 in Group C) (
From the immediate postoperative to the last follow-up time, the change of IBH showed significantly more decreased in the Group B compared with the Group A and Group C (p=0.025, p=0.001), respectively. In addition, from the immediate postoperative to the last follow-up time, the change of SKA showed significantly more increased in the Group B compared with the Group A and Group C (p=0.033, p=0.000), respectively (
We think the radiologic comparison of intergroup at the preoperative time was not meaningful because of preoperative individual difference. What we want to highlight is the interval changes of each radiologic parameter.
Interbody subsidence and loss of cervical lordosis are important problems of cages as well
Many studies reported that subsidence rate varies between 23.4-50.5%
In cases of subsidence, we frequently observed the final fusion was formed with some segmental kyphotic change that did not cause secondary symptom. They did not have to require re-operation.
However, the radiologic summation effect of IBH or subsidence
We performed computerized tomography (CT) scans to evaluate fusion in five patients of the Group A in twelve months after the operation that showed definitely bridging bone formation within the cage and around the cages at (
Although different cervical levels in this study may be pointed out the problems, we observed just the change of IBH, SKA and OKA by time period. Therefore, we think that their radiographic analysis was not influenced by the levels. The pitfalls of this study were followings; Firstly, small number of patients. Secondly, Zero-profile device has been used lately. Thirdly, we did not demonstrate fusion rate among them. Therefore, these short points may have our results be biased.
There was no significant difference according to the Odom's criteria in a single level cervical disease among three groups. However, the incidence of dysphagia is significantly lower in the Zero-profile device and stand-alone cage group compared with anterior cervical plate and iliac bone graft group(p=0.040). Naturally, the Zero-profile devices and stand-alone cage need not iliac bone harvest. The Zero-profile device group has similar radiologic result with anterior cervical plate and iliac bone graft group. Although, prospective randomized trials with more patients and longer follow-up in the Zeroprofile device are necessary to confirm its pros and cons, surgeon should select the prime device in the light of patients.
(
Postoperative radiographs illustrating the interbody height (IBH), the segmental kyphotic angle (SKA=α), and the overall kyphotic angle (OKA=β).
Coronal cervical CT scan of a patient with Zero-profile device on the C6/7 level illustrating bridging bone formation.
Demographic data of the enrolled patients
Group A | Group B | Group C | p-value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Number of Patients | 20 | 20 | 20 | |
Age (years) | 50.0±12.0 | 49.0±11.0 | 44.3±9.7 | 0.235 |
Sex (Male:Female) | 7:13 | 12:8 | 13:7 | 0.125 |
Follow-up time (months) | 13.2±1.0 | 13.1±1.2 | 13.7±1.1 | 0.253 |
Level | ||||
C3/4 | 3 | 2 | 4 | |
C4/5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | |
C5/6 | 8 | 8 | 8 | |
C6/7 | 6 | 7 | 5 |
Dysphagia scoring system
Symptom Severity | Liquid food | Solid food |
---|---|---|
None | None | None |
Mild | None | Rare |
Moderate | None or rare | Occasionally (only with specific food) |
Severe | None or rare | Frequent (majority of solids) |
Clinical outcome according to Odom’s criteria
Group A (N=20) | Group B (N=20) | Group C (N=20) | p-value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Excellent | 15 | 14 | 16 | 0.766 |
Good | 5 | 6 | 4 | |
Fair | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Poor | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Incidence of dysphagia
p-value | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Group A (N=20) | Group B (N=20) | Group C (N=20) | Group A vs Group B | Group B vs Group C | Group A vs Group C | |
Dysphagia n (%) | 1 (5.0) | 1 (5.0) | 6 (30.0) | 1.000 | 0.040 | 0.040 |
The mean values and the comparison of the preoperative, the immediate postoperative and the last follow-up time
Parameters | Pre | Post | Last | P-value | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pre vs Post | Post vs Last | Pre vs Last | |||||
Group A (N=20) | IBH (mm) | 33.69±3.17 | 38.18±3.89 | 35.07±3.74 | 0.000* | 0.000* | 0.000* |
SKA(°) | 1.14±5.33 | 6.30±3.70 | 3.46±5.21 | 0.001* | 0.000* | 0.000* | |
OKA(°) | 7.66±12.66 | 10.59±8.13 | 12.51±11.07 | 0.102 | 0.106 | 0.142 | |
Group B (N=20) | IBH (mm) | 34.01±3.98 | 37.03±3.57 | 32.40±3.47 | 0.000* | 0.000* | 0.000* |
SKA(°) | -1.36±5.11 | 3.49±4.99 | -2.69±5.26 | 0.004* | 0.007* | 0.011* | |
OKA(°) | 12.31±9.80 | 10.70±8.77 | 11.32±6.91 | 0.108 | 0.041 | 0.066 | |
Group C (N=20) | IBH (mm) | 35.04±3.65 | 37.17±3.73 | 34.71±3.88 | 0.000* | 0.000* | 0.000* |
SKA(°) | -2.15±7.57 | 3.93±3.73 | 3.85±4.87 | 0.001* | 0.000* | 0.000* | |
OKA(°) | 9.93±12.28 | 9.00±7.18 | 14.73±9.22 | 0.354 | 0.483 | 0.422 |
IBH, inter-body height; SKA, segmental kyphotic angle; OKA, overall kyphotic angle; Pre, the preoperative; Post, the immediate postoperative; Last, the last follow-up
The comparison of intergroup
Difference | Parameters | Group A | Group B | Group C | p-value | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Group A vs Group B | Group B vs Group C | Group A vs Group C | |||||
Post-Pre | IBH (mm) | 4.49±2.33 | 3.02±2.62 | 2.12±2.11 | 0.052 | 0.036* | 0.001* |
SKA(°) | 5.16±5.22 | 4.85±6.87 | 6.08±7.99 | 0.435 | 0.383 | 0.446 | |
OKA(°) | 2.92±13.27 | -1.61±9.58 | -0.93±11.66 | 0.055 | 0.393 | 0.111 | |
Last-Post | IBH (mm) | -3.11±2.28 | -4.62±2.40 | -2.45±1.82 | 0.025* | 0.001* | 0.240 |
SKA(°) | -2.83±5.14 | -6.18±5.45 | -0.07±4.80 | 0.033* | 0.000* | 0.064 | |
OKA(°) | 1.92±12.37 | 0.61±8.93 | 5.72±8.93 | 0.414 | 0.064 | 0.116 | |
Last-Pre | IBH (mm) | 1.38±2.27 | -1.60±2.37 | -0.32±1.94 | 0.000* | 0.055 | 0.004* |
SKA(°) | 2.32±6.69 | -1.33±6.14 | 6.00±9.60 | 0.025* | 0.006* | 0.171 | |
OKA(°) | 4.85±11.14 | -0.99±9.74 | 4.79±12.55 | 0.044* | 0.079 | 0.377 |
IBH, inter-body height; SKA, segmental kyphotic angle; OKA, overall kyphotic angle; Pre, the preoperative; Post, the immediate postoperative; Last, the last follow-up
Incidence of subsidence
p-value | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Group A (N=20) | Group B (N=20) | Group C (N=20) | Group A vs Group B | Group B vs Group C | Group A vs Group C | |
Subsidence n(%) | 10 (50.0) | 14(70.0) | 9(45.0) | 0.202 | 0.114 | 0.755 |
0.338 |