In a retrospective cohort study we compared the clinical outcome and complications, including dysphagia, following anterior cervical fusion for the treatment of cervical spondylosis using either a zero-profile (Zero-P; Synthes) implant or an anterior cervical plate and cage. A total of 83 patients underwent fusion using a Zero-P and 107 patients underwent fusion using a plate and cage. The mean follow-up was 18.6 months (. sd. 4.2) in the Zero-P group and 19.3 months (. sd. 4.1) in the plate and cage group. All patients in both groups had significant symptomatic and neurological improvement. There were no significant differences between the groups in the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and visual analogue scores at final follow-up. The cervical alignment improved in both groups. There was a higher incidence of dysphagia in the plate and cage group on the day after surgery and at two months post-operatively. All patients achieved fusion and no graft migration or nonunion was observed. When compared with the traditional anterior cervical plate and cage, the Zero-P implant is a safe and convenient procedure giving good results in patients with symptomatic cervical spondylosis with a reduced incidence of dysphagia post-operatively. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:543–7

We investigated the static and cyclical strength of parallel and angulated locking plate screws using rigid polyurethane foam (0.32 g/cm³) and bovine cancellous bone blocks. Custom-made stainless steel plates with two conically threaded screw holes with different angulations (parallel, 10° and 20° divergent) and 5 mm self-tapping locking screws underwent pull-out and cyclical pull and bending tests. The bovine cancellous blocks were only subjected to static pull-out testing. We also performed finite element analysis for the static pull-out test of the parallel and 20° configurations. In both the foam model and the bovine cancellous bone we found the significantly highest pull-out force for the parallel constructs. In the finite element analysis there was a 47% more damage in the 20° divergent constructs than in the parallel configuration. Under cyclical loading, the mean number of cycles to failure was significantly higher for the parallel group, followed by the 10° and 20° divergent configurations.

In our laboratory setting we clearly showed the biomechanical disadvantage of a diverging locking screw angle under static and cyclical loading.

We evaluated the efficacy of anterior fusion alone compared with combined anterior and posterior fusion for the treatment of degenerative cervical kyphosis. Anterior fusion alone was undertaken in 15 patients (group A) and combined anterior and posterior fusion was carried out in a further 15 (group B). The degree and maintenance of the angle of correction, the incidence of graft subsidence, degeneration at adjacent levels and the rate of fusion were assessed radiologically and clinically and the rate of complications recorded. The mean angle of correction in group B was significantly higher than in group A (p = 0.0009). The mean visual analogue scale and the neck disability index in group B was better than in group A (p = 0.043, 0.0006). The mean operation time and the blood loss in B were greater than in group A (p < 0.0001, 0.037). Pseudarthrosis, subsidence of the cage, and problems related to the hardware were more prevalent in group A than in group B (p = 0.034, 0.025, 0.013).

Although the combined procedure resulted in a longer operating time and greater blood loss than with anterior fusion alone, our results suggest that for the treatment of degenerative cervical kyphosis the combined approach leads to better maintenance of sagittal alignment, a higher rate of fusion, a lower incidence of complications and a better clinical outcome.