Zero-profile Anchored Spacer(Zero-p) Versus Plate-cage Construct(PCC) In The Treatment Of Bisegmental Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Objectives:To retrospectively compare the clinical outcomes of Zero-profile anchored spacer(Zero-p) versus plate-cage construct(PCC) in the treatment of bisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy.Methods:From October 2010 to October 2014, the clinical data of 51 patients with bisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy were retrospectively analyzed. 20 patients adopting Zero-p interbody fusion cage as implant(Zero-p group) and 31 patients adopting integrated plate-cage construct(PCC) as implant(PCC group). The factors of we compared included the operation time, intraoperatve blood loss, Japanese Orthopaedic Association(JOA) scores before and after operation, intervertebral height, cervical physiological curvature, postoperative dysphagia rate, complications.Results:1. Zero-p group’s operation time is 91.3±11.6 min,which is lower than those of PCC group(109.8±15.3 min), so their differences are statistically significant(P?<?0.05). Zero-p group’s intraoperative blood loss is 22.1±2.3 ml,which is lower than those of PCC group(23.2±1.4 ml), but their differences are not statistically significant(P>0.05). 2.The two groups’ JOA scores 3 months after operation and in the last follow-up are significantly higher than those before operation, so the differences are statistically significant(P?<?0.05). Cobb angle 3 months after operation and in the last follow-up improves obviously compared with before operation, so the difference is statistically significant(P?<?0.05). The Zero-p group’s Cobb angle 3 months after operation and in the last follow-up are significantly higher than PCC group’s Cobb angle, so the differences are statistically significant(P?<?0.05). The two groups’ operation segments intervertebral height 3 months after operation and in the last follow-up improves obviously compared with before operation, so the difference is statistically significant(P?<?0.05). The two groups’ NDI 3 months after operation and in the last follow-up improves obviously compared with before operation, so the difference is statistically significant(P?<?0.05). 3.Zero-p group has one patient with complication after operation and PCC group has ten patients with dyphagias after operation, so there is statistical difference between the two groups on dysphagia rate(P<0.05).Conclusions:1.Zero-profile implant and PCC implant both achieved good clinical effects on the treatment of bisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy.2. Zero-profile implant has the advantages of easy operation, short operation time, less intraoperative blood loss and less complication.