[A case-control study of cervical spine Key-hole technique and anterior cervical Zero-P system in the treatment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy].

OBJECTIVE

To explore the short-term clinical efficacy of single-stage cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR) between the minimally invasive Key-hole technique and anterior cervical Zero profile intervertebral fusion system (Zero-P).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 45 patients who underwent surgical treatment for CSR from January 2017 to January 2020, including 21 in Key hole group (12 males and 9 females), followed up for 10-22(13.2±2.3) months;24 cases in Zero-P group (14 males and 10 females), and the follow up period was 10 to 23(12.7±1.9) months. Perioperative conditions (incision length, intraoperative blood loss, operation time, length of hospital stay, and complications) were compared between two groups, and X-rays of cervical spine before and after surgery and at the final follow-up were taken to analyzed curvature of the cervical spine, visual analogue scale(VAS) of pain before and after surgery, Oswestry Disability Index(ODI) and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score of cervical spine were recorded to evaluate clinical efficacy.

RESULTS

In Key-hole group and Zero-P group, the surgical incision length, intraoperative blood loss, operation time, final follow-up Cobb angle and immediate postoperative VAS score respectively were (1.2±0.2) cm, (5.3±0.3) cm;(35.3±9.7) ml, (120.2±13.5) ml;(56.4±11.3) min, (90.6±12.6) min;(3.2±3.9)°, (7.3±3.8)°;(2.8±1.2)points, (3.8±1.1) points;the Zero-P group was larger than the Key hole group, with statistical significance(<0.05) . There were no statistically significant difference in length of hospital stay, ODI and JOA scores between two groups (>0.05). After the follow-up, 1 case of neurostimulation symptoms in Key-hole group was relieved by conservative treatment, 2 cases improved after reoperation due to recurrence of cervical disc herniation;2 cases of neurostimulation symptoms in Zero-P group, 2 cases of throat discomfort, and 1 case dural tears were all relieved by conservative treatment.

CONCLUSION

The cervical spine Key-hole technology is similar to the anterior cervical Zero-P system in the treatment of CSR. The Key-hole technique has certain advantages in incision length, intraoperative blood loss, and operation time. It is a safe, effective and can be widely used cervical spine surgery method.