ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2023
Outcomes of different zero-profile spacers in the treatment of two-level cervical degenerative disk disease.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomechanical comparison of multiple zero-profile systems in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a finite element analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Biomechanical evaluation of the novel assembled internal fixed system in C2-C3 anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a finite element analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to analyze the clinical and radiological outcomes of two different zero-profile spacers (ROI-C and anchor-C) in contiguous two-level ACDF for CDDD patients.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent contiguous two-level ACDF due to CDDD between January 2015 and December 2020 in our hospital. Patients who received ROI-C and anchor-C were included as the study groups, and those who underwent plate-cage construct (PCC) were included as the control group. The primary outcome measures were radiographical parameters, and the secondary outcome measures were dysphagia, JOA scores and VAS scores for these patients.
resultsA total of 91 patients were enrolled in the study; there were 31, 21 and 39 patients in the ROI-C, anchor-C and PCC groups, respectively. The mean follow-up duration was 24.52 months (range, 18-48 months) in the ROI-C group, 24.38 months (range, 16-52 months) in the anchor-C group and 25.18 months (range, 15-54 months) in the PCC group. The loss of the intervertebral space height and cage subsidence rate in the ROI-C group were significantly higher than those in the anchor-C group and PCC group at the final follow-up (P < 0.05). The ROI-C group showed a lower incidence of adjacent segment degeneration than the anchor-C group and PCC group, but the difference was not significant. The fusion rates were not different among these three groups. The early dysphagia rate was significantly lower in the patients with zero-profile spacers than in the PCC group (P < 0.05), but the difference was not significant at the last follow-up. No relevant differences were found in the JOA scores and VAS scores.
conclusionsZero-profile spacers showed promising clinical outcomes in CDDD patients having contiguous two-level ACDF. However, ROI-C resulted in a higher intervertebral space height loss and a higher cage subsidence rate than anchor-C during the follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37198504What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.