ArticleCureus2026
The Effectiveness of Zero-Profile Cages Versus Traditional Bone Graft Placement With Plate Fixation in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Single- and Two-Level Cervical Prolapsed Intervertebral Discs: A Comparative Prospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is considered the gold standard procedure for fixation of cervical disc degenerative disease. However, the optimal construct remains debated between zero-profile cages and bone graft with anterior plate fixation. Objective This study aims to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of zero-profile cages with standard bone graft and plate fixation in single- and two-level cervical prolapsed intervertebral disc surgery. Methods This prospective observational study was conducted at the Neurosurgery department after enrolling patients aged 18-70 years with symptomatic cervical disc disease refractory to ≥6 weeks of conservative management who underwent ACDF either with a zero-profile titanium cage (Group A) or with autologous iliac crest bone graft and anterior cervical plate fixation (Group B). Standard surgical technique (Smith-Robinson approach) and uniform postoperative protocols were used. Clinical outcomes (Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)) and radiological fusion were assessed preoperatively and at 12 months. Results A total of 103 patients were included in the study (Group A: 57; Group B: 46). At 12 months, significant improvement in NDI was observed in both groups (Group A: 21/57 (36.8%) had improved scores vs. 3/57 (5.3%) worsened; Group B: 17/46 (37.0%) improved vs. 3/46 (6.5%) worsened; both p < 0.01). VAS scores also improved significantly (Group A: 23/57 (40.4%) improved; Group B: 18/46 (39.1%); p < 0.01). Fusion was achieved in 51/57 (89.5%) in Group A and 39/46 (84.8%) in Group B (p = 0.301). Dysphagia with plate fixation was 3/46 (6.5%) and with zero-profile cages was 4/57 (7.0%). No significant difference in re-operations was noted. Conclusion Both techniques demonstrated comparable functional outcomes and fusion rates. However, zero-profile cages were associated with a significantly lower re-operation rate compared with bone graft and plate fixation, indicating a potential advantage in reducing revision surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.