Anterior-only stabilization using cage versus plating with bone autograft for the treatment of @entity174 combined with XXXX .

@entity1 @entity3510 @entity174 @entity190 @entity12316 @entity158 @entity1798
BACKGROUND: Anterior C2/3 discectomy and interbody fusion (ACDF) with plating is increasingly performed as the primary treatment of unstable @entity174 ; however, plate-related complications, such as screw back-out, plate @entity174 and soft-tissue injury, is not uncommon. @entity12316 ( @entity12316 ) cage has now been developed to provide initial stability before fusion; however, whether and how ACDF with @entity12316 cage offer better clinical results compared with ACDF with plating in management of @entity174 remains unknown. This study compares the efficacy of ACDF with plating to that of ACDF with @entity12316 cage in management of @entity174 (according to Levine and Edwards classification) retrospectively. METHODS: From February 2006 to March 2012, a total of 21 @entity1 with @entity174 combined with @entity1798 underwent ACDF with @entity12316 cage, and 28 @entity1 underwent ACDF with plating. Perioperative parameters were compared. The average follow-up period was 50.3  months (range 27-76 months). The clinical outcome (visual analog scale (VAS), American @entity3510 Association (ASIA) scale, and clinical post-traumatic neck score (PTNC)) and radiological outcome (translation of C2, local kyphotic angle (LKA), and fusion status of C2/3) was compared retrospectively. RESULTS: The operative time and @entity190 were significantly less in the ACDF with cage group compared with that in the ACDF with plating group (P   <   0.05). All @entity1 showed neurological recovery and achieved solid fusion. There were no significant differences in the clinical and radiological outcomes at final follow-up between groups, except in the LKA and the correction loss rate of LKA which were higher in the ACDF with plating group (P   <   0.05). Donor-site @entity158 occurred in two @entity1 (10.1%) within 6  months after operation in the ACDF with plating group and none in the ACDF with cage group. All @entity1 recovered without any adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: ACDF with @entity12316 cage is effective and reliable in management of @entity174 and is more cost-effective due to shorter operative time and less @entity190 requirements.
