Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with a zero-profile VA spacer device: a clinical and radiological study with two-year follow-up.

ABSTRACT

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes of the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with a novel zero-profile variable-angle (Zero-P VA) spacer and a traditional poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) cage and plate system in cases pertaining to cervical radiculopathy/myelopathy. There are two conventional types of ACDF procedures aimed at treating symptomatic cervical spondylosis. The first one involves an uninstrumented "stand-alone" approach utilizing bone graft/cage, while the second incorporates bone graft/cage in conjunction with a front plate positioned before the vertebral bodies. Both procedures have their own inherent advantages and disadvantages. The Zero-P VA spacer, however, represents a unique synthesis by amalgamating the advantages of both traditionally typical procedures. Notably, this spacer can potentially circumvent the issue related to prevertebral soft-tissue disturbance and reduce the occurrence of dysphagia. METHODS: Using our surgical database, the authors systematically conducted a retrospective analysis encompassing all patients who underwent single-level ACDF between January 2018 and January 2019, with a minimum two-year follow-up. Patients either received a Zero-P VA implant or PEEK cage coupled with plating. The Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for arm and neck pain were documented. Dysphagia was evaluated using the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (ETA-10). Additional parameters such as cervical alignment, fusion rate and the incidence of postoperative complications were assessed. RESULTS: According to the outcomes of the statistical analysis, there was no substantial disparity that emerged in the advancements observed in the JOA and VAS metrics between the two study cohorts. Noteworthy, however, the ETA-10 scores were statistically significantly reduced in the Zero-P VA group compared to the cage and plating group (p < 0.05). At the final follow-up, there were no statistically significant differences in the height of the operated segment, Cobb angle of the fused segment, C2-C7 Cobb angle and fusion rate between the two groups (p > 0.05). However, postoperative complications were slightly lower in patients with the Zero-P VA group (7.69%) as compared to the cage and plating group (16.67%). CONCLUSION: The clinical outcomes observed with the Zero-P VA spacer used for single-level ACDF were found to be satisfactory. The performance of this device is comparable or even superior to the traditional cage and plating method in preventing postoperative dysphagia and mitigating potential complications associated with the use of a plate.