Radiographic subsidence after single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; a comparison between blade-anchored zero-profile cages and stand-alone cages

BACKGROUND: Cage subsidence is a common radiographic finding after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), particularly with stand-alone cages, and may compromise postoperative alignment and stability. Blade-anchored zero-profile cages have been developed to provide immediate fixation while avoiding plate-related complications; however, their influence on subsidence characteristics has not been fully elucidated. This study aimed to compare the magnitude and direction of radiographic subsidence between blade-anchored zero-profile cages and stand-alone cages after single-level ACDF. METHODS: This retrospective single-center study included 76 patients who underwent single-level ACDF between 2017 and 2024 using either a blade-anchored zero-profile cage or a stand-alone cage. The anterior disc height (ADH) and posterior disc height (PDH) were measured preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at 6 months after surgery. The mean disc height was defined as the average of the ADH and PDH. Radiographic subsidence was calculated as the difference between the immediate postoperative and 6-month mean disc heights. Anterior and posterior subsidence were analyzed separately. Multivariable linear regression analyses were performed in two steps: Model 1 adjusted for demographic and baseline radiographic variables, and Model 2 further adjusted for disc height recovery to account for the effect of intraoperative disc height restoration. RESULTS: Mean subsidence was significantly greater in the blade-anchored zero-profile cage group than in the stand-alone cage group, and the incidence of subsidence ≥ 3 mm was higher with blade-anchored cages. Directional analysis demonstrated significantly greater anterior subsidence in the blade-anchored group, whereas posterior subsidence did not differ between the groups. In the multivariate analysis, cage type was independently associated with subsidence in Model 1; however, this association was attenuated after adjustment for disc height recovery in Model 2. CONCLUSIONS: Blade-anchored zero-profile cages were associated with greater radiographic subsidence after single-level ACDF compared with stand-alone cages, primarily due to increased anterior subsidence. The attenuation of the cage-type effect after adjustment for disc height recovery suggests a potential role of restoration-related factors. Directional assessment of subsidence may provide additional insights into implant-specific behavior.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Published
2026-05-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-026-06936-8
Primary Topic
Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Radiographic subsidence after single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; a comparison between blade-anchored zero-profile cages and stand-alone cages

Akiyoshi Miyamoto, Tadashi Komatsubara, Shinya Arataki, Masato Tanaka
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
article

Radiographic subsidence after single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; a comparison between blade-anchored zero-profile cages and stand-alone cages

Akiyoshi Miyamoto, Tadashi Komatsubara, Shinya Arataki, Masato Tanaka
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cage subsidence is a common radiographic finding after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), particularly with stand-alone cages, and may compromise postoperative alignment and stability. Blade-anchored zero-profile cages have been developed to provide immediate fixation while avoiding plate-related complications; however, their influence on subsidence characteristics has not been fully elucidated. This study aimed to compare the magnitude and direction of radiographic subsidence between blade-anchored zero-profile cages and stand-alone cages after single-level ACDF. METHODS: This retrospective single-center study included 76 patients who underwent single-level ACDF between 2017 and 2024 using either a blade-anchored zero-profile cage or a stand-alone cage. The anterior disc height (ADH) and posterior disc height (PDH) were measured preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at 6 months after surgery. The mean disc height was defined as the average of the ADH and PDH. Radiographic subsidence was calculated as the difference between the immediate postoperative and 6-month mean disc heights. Anterior and posterior subsidence were analyzed separately. Multivariable linear regression analyses were performed in two steps: Model 1 adjusted for demographic and baseline radiographic variables, and Model 2 further adjusted for disc height recovery to account for the effect of intraoperative disc height restoration. RESULTS: Mean subsidence was significantly greater in the blade-anchored zero-profile cage group than in the stand-alone cage group, and the incidence of subsidence ≥ 3 mm was higher with blade-anchored cages. Directional analysis demonstrated significantly greater anterior subsidence in the blade-anchored group, whereas posterior subsidence did not differ between the groups. In the multivariate analysis, cage type was independently associated with subsidence in Model 1; however, this association was attenuated after adjustment for disc height recovery in Model 2. CONCLUSIONS: Blade-anchored zero-profile cages were associated with greater radiographic subsidence after single-level ACDF compared with stand-alone cages, primarily due to increased anterior subsidence. The attenuation of the cage-type effect after adjustment for disc height recovery suggests a potential role of restoration-related factors. Directional assessment of subsidence may provide additional insights into implant-specific behavior.

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Okayama Rosai Hospital (JP)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.