Cargando…
Comparison among perfect-C®, zero-P®, and plates with a cage in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease
BACKGROUND: We intended to analyze the efficacy of a new integrated cage and plate device called Perfect-C for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) to cure single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. METHODS: We enrolled 148 patients who were subjected to single-level ACDF with one of...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5784656/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29368613 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-018-1950-9 |
_version_ | 1783295491094609920 |
---|---|
author | Noh, Sung Hyun Zhang, Ho Yeol |
author_facet | Noh, Sung Hyun Zhang, Ho Yeol |
author_sort | Noh, Sung Hyun |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: We intended to analyze the efficacy of a new integrated cage and plate device called Perfect-C for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) to cure single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. METHODS: We enrolled 148 patients who were subjected to single-level ACDF with one of the following three surgical devices: a Perfect-C implant (41 patients), a Zero-P implant (36 patients), or a titanium plate with a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage (71 patients). We conducted a retrospective study to compare the clinical and radiological results among the three groups. RESULTS: The length of the operation, intraoperative blood loss, and duration of hospitalization were significantly lower in the Perfect-C group than in the Zero-P and plate-with-cage groups (P < 0.05). At the last follow-up visit, heterotopic ossification (HO) was not observed in any cases (0%) in the Perfect-C and Zero-P groups but was noted in 21 cases (30%) in the plate-with-cage group. The cephalad and caudal plate-to-disc distance (PDD) and the cephalad and caudal PDD/anterior body height (ABH) were significantly greater in the Perfect-C and Zero-P groups than in the plate-with-cage group (P < 0.05). Subsidence occurred in five cases (14%) in the Perfect-C group, in nine cases (25%) in the Zero-P group, and in 15 cases (21%) in the plate-with-cage group. Fusion occurred in 37 cases (90%) in the Perfect-C group, in 31 cases (86%) in the Zero-P group, and in 68 cases (95%) in the plate-with-cage group. CONCLUSIONS: The Perfect-C, Zero-P, and plate-with-cage devices are effective for treating single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. However, the Perfect-C implant has many advantages over both the Zero-P implant and conventional plate-cage treatments. The Perfect-C implant was associated with shorter operation times and hospitalization durations, less blood loss, and lower subsidence rates compared with the Zero-P implant or the titanium plate with a PEEK cage. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5784656 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57846562018-02-07 Comparison among perfect-C®, zero-P®, and plates with a cage in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease Noh, Sung Hyun Zhang, Ho Yeol BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: We intended to analyze the efficacy of a new integrated cage and plate device called Perfect-C for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) to cure single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. METHODS: We enrolled 148 patients who were subjected to single-level ACDF with one of the following three surgical devices: a Perfect-C implant (41 patients), a Zero-P implant (36 patients), or a titanium plate with a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage (71 patients). We conducted a retrospective study to compare the clinical and radiological results among the three groups. RESULTS: The length of the operation, intraoperative blood loss, and duration of hospitalization were significantly lower in the Perfect-C group than in the Zero-P and plate-with-cage groups (P < 0.05). At the last follow-up visit, heterotopic ossification (HO) was not observed in any cases (0%) in the Perfect-C and Zero-P groups but was noted in 21 cases (30%) in the plate-with-cage group. The cephalad and caudal plate-to-disc distance (PDD) and the cephalad and caudal PDD/anterior body height (ABH) were significantly greater in the Perfect-C and Zero-P groups than in the plate-with-cage group (P < 0.05). Subsidence occurred in five cases (14%) in the Perfect-C group, in nine cases (25%) in the Zero-P group, and in 15 cases (21%) in the plate-with-cage group. Fusion occurred in 37 cases (90%) in the Perfect-C group, in 31 cases (86%) in the Zero-P group, and in 68 cases (95%) in the plate-with-cage group. CONCLUSIONS: The Perfect-C, Zero-P, and plate-with-cage devices are effective for treating single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. However, the Perfect-C implant has many advantages over both the Zero-P implant and conventional plate-cage treatments. The Perfect-C implant was associated with shorter operation times and hospitalization durations, less blood loss, and lower subsidence rates compared with the Zero-P implant or the titanium plate with a PEEK cage. BioMed Central 2018-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5784656/ /pubmed/29368613 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-018-1950-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Noh, Sung Hyun Zhang, Ho Yeol Comparison among perfect-C®, zero-P®, and plates with a cage in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease |
title | Comparison among perfect-C®, zero-P®, and plates with a cage in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease |
title_full | Comparison among perfect-C®, zero-P®, and plates with a cage in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease |
title_fullStr | Comparison among perfect-C®, zero-P®, and plates with a cage in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison among perfect-C®, zero-P®, and plates with a cage in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease |
title_short | Comparison among perfect-C®, zero-P®, and plates with a cage in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease |
title_sort | comparison among perfect-c®, zero-p®, and plates with a cage in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5784656/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29368613 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-018-1950-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nohsunghyun comparisonamongperfectczeropandplateswithacageinsinglelevelcervicaldegenerativediscdisease AT zhanghoyeol comparisonamongperfectczeropandplateswithacageinsinglelevelcervicaldegenerativediscdisease |