• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术使用零轮廓三维打印椎间融合器与钛板融合器的疗效比较

[Effectiveness comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with zero-profile three-dimensional-printed interbody fusion Cage and titanium plate fusion Cage].

作者信息

Li Yuwei, Li Xiuzhi, Li Bowen, Gu Yunling, Yang Tiantian, Zhao Lei, Cui Wei, Gu Shifeng, Wang Haijiao

机构信息

Department of Orthopedics, Luohe Central Hospital, Luohe Henan, 462000, P. R. China.

Department of Orthopedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100191, P. R. China.

出版信息

Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2025 Sep 15;39(9):1187-1195. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202505049.

DOI:10.7507/1002-1892.202505049
PMID:40948012
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12440701/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of a zero-profile three-dimensiaonal (3D)-printed microporous titanium alloy Cage and a conventional titanium plate combined with a polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK)-Cage in the treatment of single-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) by anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

METHODS

The clinical data of 83 patients with single-segment CSM treated with ACDF between January 2022 and January 2023 were retrospectively analyzed, and they were divided into 3D-ZP group (35 cases, using zero-profile 3D-printed microporous titanium alloy Cage) and CP group (48 cases, using titanium plate in combination with PEEK-Cage). There was no significant difference in gender, age, disease duration, surgical intervertebral space, and preoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, neck disability index (NDI), vertebral height at the fusion segment, Cobb angle, and other baseline data between the two groups (>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, complications, interbody fusion, and prosthesis subsidence were recorded and compared between the two groups. VAS score, NDI, and JOA score were used to evaluate the improvement of pain and function before operation, at 3 months after operation, and at last follow-up, and the vertebral height at the fusion segment and Cobb angle were measured by imaging. The degree of dysphagia was assessed by the Bazaz dysphagia scale at 1 week and at last follow-up.

RESULTS

The operation was successfully completed in all the 83 patients. There was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss and hospital stay between the two groups (>0.05), but the operation time in the 3D-ZP group was significantly shorter than that in the CP group (<0.05). Patients in both groups were followed up 24-35 months, with an average of 25.3 months, and there was no significant difference in the follow-up time between the two groups (>0.05). The incidence and grade of dysphagia in CP group were significantly higher than those in 3D-ZP group at 1 week after operation and at last follow-up (<0.05). There was no dysphagia in 3D-ZP group at last follow-up. There was no complication such as implant breakage or displacement in both groups. The intervertebral fusion rates of 3D-ZP group and CP group were 65.71% (23/35) and 60.42% (29/48) respectively at 3 months after operation, and there was no significant difference between the two groups [ (95%)=1.256 (0.507, 3.109), =0.622]. The JOA score, VAS score, and NDI significantly improved in the 3D-ZP group at 3 months and at last follow-up when compared with preoperative ones (<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups (>0.05). There was no significant difference in the improvement rate of JOA between the two groups at last follow-up (>0.05). At 3 months after operation and at last follow-up, the vertebral height at the fusion segment and Cobb angle significantly improved in both groups, and the two indexes in 3D-ZP group were significantly better than those in CP group (<0.05). At last follow-up, the incidence of prosthesis subsidence in 3D-ZP group (8.57%) was significantly lower than that in CP group (29.16%) (<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The application of zero-profile 3D-printed Cage and titanium plate combined with PEEK-Cage in single-segment ACDF can both reconstruct the stability of cervical spine and achieve good effectiveness. Compared with the latter, the application of the former in ACDF can shorten the operation time, reduce the incidence of prosthesis subsidence, and reduce the incidence of dysphagia.

摘要

目的

比较零轮廓三维(3D)打印微孔钛合金椎间融合器与传统钛板联合聚醚醚酮(PEEK)椎间融合器在前路颈椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)治疗单节段脊髓型颈椎病(CSM)中的有效性。

方法

回顾性分析2022年1月至2023年1月行ACDF治疗的83例单节段CSM患者的临床资料,将其分为3D-ZP组(35例,采用零轮廓3D打印微孔钛合金椎间融合器)和CP组(48例,采用钛板联合PEEK椎间融合器)。两组患者在性别、年龄、病程、手术节段、术前日本骨科协会(JOA)评分、视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分、颈部功能障碍指数(NDI)、融合节段椎体高度、Cobb角等基线资料方面差异无统计学意义(>0.05)。记录并比较两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间、并发症、椎间融合及假体下沉情况。采用VAS评分、NDI和JOA评分评估术前、术后3个月及末次随访时疼痛和功能的改善情况,通过影像学测量融合节段椎体高度和Cobb角。在术后1周和末次随访时采用Bazaz吞咽困难量表评估吞咽困难程度。

结果

83例患者均顺利完成手术。两组患者术中出血量和住院时间差异无统计学意义(>0.05),但3D-ZP组手术时间明显短于CP组(<0.05)。两组患者均随访24 - 35个月,平均25.3个月,两组随访时间差异无统计学意义(>0.05)。术后1周及末次随访时,CP组吞咽困难的发生率及分级均明显高于3D-ZP组(<0.05)。3D-ZP组末次随访时无吞咽困难发生。两组均未发生植入物断裂或移位等并发症。术后3个月时,3D-ZP组和CP组的椎间融合率分别为65.71%(23/35)和60.42%(29/48),两组间差异无统计学意义[(95%)=1.256(0.507,3.109),=0.622]。与术前相比,3D-ZP组术后3个月及末次随访时JOA评分、VAS评分和NDI均明显改善(<0.05),但两组间差异无统计学意义(>0.05)。末次随访时两组JOA评分改善率差异无统计学意义(>0.05)。术后3个月及末次随访时,两组融合节段椎体高度和Cobb角均明显改善,且3D-ZP组的这两项指标明显优于CP组(<0.05)。末次随访时,3D-ZP组假体下沉发生率(8.57%)明显低于CP组(29.16%)(<0.05)。

结论

零轮廓3D打印椎间融合器和钛板联合PEEK椎间融合器在单节段ACDF中均能重建颈椎稳定性,取得良好疗效。与后者相比,前者应用于ACDF可缩短手术时间,降低假体下沉发生率,减少吞咽困难的发生率。

相似文献

1
[Effectiveness comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with zero-profile three-dimensional-printed interbody fusion Cage and titanium plate fusion Cage].颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术使用零轮廓三维打印椎间融合器与钛板融合器的疗效比较
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2025 Sep 15;39(9):1187-1195. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202505049.
2
[Application of V-shaped stealth decompression technique using ultrasonic bone scalpel in anterior surgery for adjacent two-level cervical spondylosis].超声骨刀V形潜行减压技术在相邻两节段颈椎病前路手术中的应用
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2025 Jun 15;39(6):741-747. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202502056.
3
[Study on the effect of postoperative implant fusion after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion by applying nano-hydroxyapatite/collagen composite in patients with low bone mass cervical spondylosis].[纳米羟基磷灰石/胶原蛋白复合材料应用于低骨量颈椎病患者前路椎间盘切除融合术后植入物融合效果的研究]
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2025 Aug 25;38(8):800-9. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20240400.
4
Comparative clinical outcomes of ACDF with self-locking cage, cage combined with plate, and posterior laminoplasty in long-level cervical spondylosis: a two-year follow-up study.前路自锁椎间融合器、椎间融合器联合钢板与后路椎板成形术治疗长节段颈椎病的临床疗效比较:一项两年随访研究
BMC Surg. 2025 Aug 4;25(1):338. doi: 10.1186/s12893-025-02993-8.
5
[Effectiveness of three-dimensional printing artificial vertebral body and interbody fusion Cage in anterior cervical surgery].[三维打印人工椎体及椎间融合器在颈椎前路手术中的有效性]
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2021 Sep 15;35(9):1147-1154. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202103003.
6
[Comparison of effectiveness between zero-profile anchored cage and plate-cage construct in treatment of consecutive three-level cervical spondylosis].零切迹椎间融合器与钢板-椎间融合器治疗连续三节段颈椎病的疗效比较
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2025 Feb 15;39(2):193-200. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202410092.
7
Does Bone Preservation at the Anterior Edge of the Vertebral Body Affect the Subsidence of Zero-Profile Cages After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion?椎体前缘骨质保留是否会影响颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术后零轮廓椎间融合器的下沉?
World Neurosurg. 2025 Feb;194:123474. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2024.11.057. Epub 2024 Dec 5.
8
Comparison of Lumbar Interbody Fusion with 3D-Printed Porous Titanium Cage Versus Polyetheretherketone Cage in Treating Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.3D打印多孔钛笼与聚醚醚酮笼用于腰椎椎间融合治疗腰椎退行性疾病的比较:一项系统评价与Meta分析
World Neurosurg. 2024 Mar;183:144-156. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2023.12.111. Epub 2023 Dec 23.
9
[Efficacy comparison of zero-profile intervertebral fusion and stand-alone interbody cage combined with cage-titanium plate construct in treatment of two-segment skip cervical spondylosis].零切迹椎间融合与单纯椎间融合器联合钛板治疗双节段跳跃型颈椎病的疗效比较
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2022 May 24;102(19):1450-1457. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20220128-00208.
10
[The predictive value of bone mineral density in different parts of the vertebral body for postoperative cage subsidence in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion].[椎体不同部位骨密度对颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术后椎间融合器下沉的预测价值]
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2025 Sep 1;63(9):799-805. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112139-20250326-00157.

本文引用的文献

1
Biomechanical performance of a novel zero-profile interbody cage: A cadaveric study.一种新型零轮廓椎间融合器的生物力学性能:一项尸体研究。
PLoS One. 2025 Apr 29;20(4):e0317375. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0317375. eCollection 2025.
2
Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in treating acute myelopathy caused by cervical spondylitis: a case series.前路颈椎间盘切除融合术治疗颈椎病所致急性脊髓病:病例系列
Ann Med. 2025 Dec;57(1):2493308. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2025.2493308. Epub 2025 Apr 18.
3
Early dysphagia following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a centre experience.颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术后早期吞咽困难:一家中心的经验
BMC Res Notes. 2025 Apr 11;18(1):162. doi: 10.1186/s13104-025-07215-1.
4
Risk Factors for "Adjacent-Level Ossification Development" Other Than Short Plate-to-Disc Distance and Clinical Implications for Adjacent-Segment Pathology.除短节段钢板与椎间盘距离外的“相邻节段骨化发展”危险因素及对相邻节段病变的临床意义
Neurospine. 2025 Mar;22(1):194-201. doi: 10.14245/ns.2448832.416. Epub 2025 Mar 31.
5
A Comparative Analysis of the Clinical and Radiological Results of a Zero-Profile Device Versus Conventional Cage and Plate Following Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.单节段颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术后零轮廓装置与传统椎间融合器及钢板的临床和影像学结果对比分析
Cureus. 2025 Mar 4;17(3):e80067. doi: 10.7759/cureus.80067. eCollection 2025 Mar.
6
A retrospective comparative analysis of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using stand-alone titanium cage versus cage and plate fixation in two-level cervical disc herniation.对采用独立钛笼与笼加钢板固定进行两节段颈椎间盘突出症前路椎间盘切除融合术的回顾性比较分析。
J Orthop Surg Res. 2025 Mar 10;20(1):256. doi: 10.1186/s13018-025-05654-x.
7
Biomechanical analysis of a newly designed and 3D printed plate-locking interbody cage: an observational study of finite element analysis.一种新设计的3D打印锁定钢板椎间融合器的生物力学分析:有限元分析的观察性研究
Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 28;15(1):3534. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-88151-9.
8
Cage only or cage with plate fixation in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery - analysis of a national multicenter dataset.颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合手术中单纯椎间融合器或椎间融合器联合钢板固定——一项全国多中心数据集分析
Spine J. 2025 May;25(5):947-955. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2024.12.004. Epub 2024 Dec 9.
9
Is cervical disc arthroplasty an effective treatment option for patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy? A matched cohort analysis compared to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.颈椎间盘置换术对脊髓型颈椎病患者是一种有效的治疗选择吗?一项匹配队列分析,并与颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术进行比较。
Spine J. 2025 May;25(5):921-928. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2024.11.003. Epub 2024 Nov 27.
10
Revision Surgery after Single Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With Plate vs Stand-Alone Cage over 2 to 5 Year Follow-Up.单节段颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术使用钢板与单独椎间融合器后的翻修手术:2至5年随访结果
Global Spine J. 2025 May;15(4):2014-2019. doi: 10.1177/21925682241279528. Epub 2024 Aug 27.