Zhonghai Li1,2,3, Yantao Zhao4,5, Jiaguang Tang4,5, Dongfeng Ren4,5, Jidong Guo4,5, Huadong Wang4,5, Li Li6,7, Shuxun Hou8,9. 1. Department of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of PLA General Hospital, Beijing, The People's Republic of China. lizhonghaispine@126.com. 2. Beijing Engineering Research Center of Orthopedic Implants, Beijing, The People's Republic of China. lizhonghaispine@126.com. 3. Department of Orthopaedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, The People's Republic of China. lizhonghaispine@126.com. 4. Department of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of PLA General Hospital, Beijing, The People's Republic of China. 5. Beijing Engineering Research Center of Orthopedic Implants, Beijing, The People's Republic of China. 6. Department of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of PLA General Hospital, Beijing, The People's Republic of China. lvshunman@sina.com. 7. Beijing Engineering Research Center of Orthopedic Implants, Beijing, The People's Republic of China. lvshunman@sina.com. 8. Department of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of PLA General Hospital, Beijing, The People's Republic of China. lvshunman@126.com. 9. Beijing Engineering Research Center of Orthopedic Implants, Beijing, The People's Republic of China. lvshunman@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare perioperative parameters, clinical outcomes, radiographic parameters, and complication rates of the new zero-profile, stand-alone Fidji cervical cage with those of the stand-alone cages with a titanium plate for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the surgical treatment of single- and multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD). METHODS: Between October 2009 and December 2013, 152 consecutive patients [86 males and 52 females; mean age 51.0 years (range 30-69 years)] with cervical DDD, who underwent surgery and were followed for more than 2 years, were enrolled in this study and divided into the cage group and plate group. The study compared perioperative parameters, surgery-related and implant-related complication rates, clinical outcomes, and radiologic parameters. RESULTS: The clinical and radiologic results in both groups were satisfactory after a minimum 2-year follow-up. No significant differences between the cage group and plate group in terms of improvement in the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, visual analogue scale, Neck Disability Index, Japanese Orthopedic Association scores, disc height, mean fusion time, fusion rate, adjacent segment degeneration, and restoration of cervical lordosis, but the cage group was associated with a lower risk of postoperative dysphagia, shorter operation time, less blood loss, less cost of index surgery, and relatively greater simplicity than the plate group. CONCLUSIONS: The zero-profile, stand-alone Fidji cervical cage for ACDF is an effective, reliable, and safe alternate to the conventional method for the treatment of cervical DDD. However, there is no definitive evidence that Fidji cervical cage has better intermediate-term outcomes than the stand-alone cages with a titanium plate for ACDF.
PURPOSE: To compare perioperative parameters, clinical outcomes, radiographic parameters, and complication rates of the new zero-profile, stand-alone Fidji cervical cage with those of the stand-alone cages with a titanium plate for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the surgical treatment of single- and multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD). METHODS: Between October 2009 and December 2013, 152 consecutive patients [86 males and 52 females; mean age 51.0 years (range 30-69 years)] with cervical DDD, who underwent surgery and were followed for more than 2 years, were enrolled in this study and divided into the cage group and plate group. The study compared perioperative parameters, surgery-related and implant-related complication rates, clinical outcomes, and radiologic parameters. RESULTS: The clinical and radiologic results in both groups were satisfactory after a minimum 2-year follow-up. No significant differences between the cage group and plate group in terms of improvement in the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, visual analogue scale, Neck Disability Index, Japanese Orthopedic Association scores, disc height, mean fusion time, fusion rate, adjacent segment degeneration, and restoration of cervical lordosis, but the cage group was associated with a lower risk of postoperative dysphagia, shorter operation time, less blood loss, less cost of index surgery, and relatively greater simplicity than the plate group. CONCLUSIONS: The zero-profile, stand-alone Fidji cervical cage for ACDF is an effective, reliable, and safe alternate to the conventional method for the treatment of cervical DDD. However, there is no definitive evidence that Fidji cervical cage has better intermediate-term outcomes than the stand-alone cages with a titanium plate for ACDF.
Authors: S Litrico; N Lonjon; G Riouallon; A Cogniet; O Launay; J Beaurain; A Blamoutier; H Pascal-Mousselard Journal: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res Date: 2014-08-14 Impact factor: 2.256