scholarly journals Safety of Cervical Spine Implant Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion with Zero Profile Interbody Fusion Device: A Retrospective Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. s-0035-1554140-s-0035-1554140
Author(s):  
Mukta Vadhva ◽  
Manoj Khatri
Author(s):  
Denis J. DiAngelo ◽  
Amanda L. Thomas ◽  
Kevin T. Foley

Anterior cervical graft fusion alone or supplemented with an anterior cervical plate instrumentation may be used to treat the diseased cervical spine. An anterior cervical plate is intended to restore the mechanical integrity of the operated spine and decrease graft complications. An alternative method to single-level graft fusion is to use an interbody fusion device. The objective of this study was to compare the biomechanical stability of a single-level graft-plated cervical construct with an interbody cage device.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn M. Pezzanite ◽  
Jeremiah T. Easley ◽  
Rosemary Bayless ◽  
Ellison Aldrich ◽  
Brad B. Nelson ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Zhang ◽  
Xiangyu Tang ◽  
Wei Xiong ◽  
Hua Wu ◽  
Chaoxu Liu ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose This study was to compare the clinical outcomes, radiographic parameters, and complications of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with a Zero-profile implant (Zero-P) and traditional plate and cage. Methods There were 68 patients received ACDF of single level, 35 patients with Zero-profile implant (Zero-p group) and 33 patients with traditional plate and cage (Cage group), from C3–C7 during 2014 to 2016. Collecting and analyzing of clinical and radiological data were performed. Patients were followed-up at least 1 year after surgery. The operation time, blood loss, Japan Department of Orthopedics Association (JOA) score, pain Visual Analogue Score (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI) score and dysphagia score were recorded. Additionally, changes in cervical lordosis, fusion rate and adjacent segment degeneration were analyzed as well. Results For neurologic outcomes, the JOA, VAS and NDI were statistically equivalent between the two groups (P>0.05). For radiographic outcomes, there were no significant differences in the C2-7 Cobb angles, segmental Cobb angle and incidence of subsidence at the final follow-up (P>0.05). No degenerative changes was found in the Zero-p group, whereas 5 patients in the Cage group developed degeneration in adjacent segments (P<0.05). Also, the incidence of postoperative dysphagia is higher in Cage group than in Zero-p group at 3 months and 12 months (P<0.05). Conclusions Both Zero-profile implant and anterior cervical plate interbody fusion device were demonstrated to be effective and safe strategies in this study. Considering the lower incidences of dysphagia and degenerative changes, the Zero-profile implant is a good succedaneum.


Spine ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 1201-1210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harvinder S. Sandhu ◽  
Simon Turner ◽  
J. Michael Kabo ◽  
Linda E. A. Kanim ◽  
David Liu ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 105 (5) ◽  
pp. 1157-1168
Author(s):  
Alexander C. M. Chong ◽  
Seth W. Harrer ◽  
Michael H. Heggeness ◽  
Paul H. Wooley

Author(s):  
Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski ◽  
Joseph D. Gresser ◽  
Debra J. Trantolo ◽  
Georg Schollmeier ◽  
Frank Kandziora ◽  
...  

Spine ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matti Scholz ◽  
Phillip M. Reyes ◽  
Philipp Schleicher ◽  
Anna G. U. Sawa ◽  
Seungwon Baek ◽  
...  

2001 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter A. Rasmussen ◽  
Gregory R. Trost ◽  
Clifford Tribus

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document