Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 9, 2025
Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in the Ovine Model
Published on: October 5, 2009
Efficacy of Allograft Versus Bioactive Glass-Ceramic Cage in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Randomized
Yanting Liu1, Chan Woong Park1, Phattareeya Pholprajug1,2
1Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Study Design:
A randomized controlled trial.
Objective:
The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of allografts and bioactive glass-ceramic (BG) cages for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in treating cervical degenerative disc disease.
Methods:
We conducted a single-center, randomized controlled trial between August 2017 and August 2022. Participants were randomized into two groups, and consecutive patients requiring ACDF were randomly assigned to receive either the allograft cage or the BG cage. The surgical outcomes measured included pain levels, neck disability, surgical details, and radiological assessments.
Results:
Of the 45 assessed, 40 participants were included, with 18 in the allograft cage group and 22 in the BG cage group. By the 12-month follow-up, both groups exhibited significant improvements in pain levels and disability scores, with no notable intergroup differences. Over 85% of patients in both groups were satisfied with their outcomes. Radiological assessments revealed stability in the cervical spine with both cage types post intervention. Although both materials showed a trend toward increased subsidence over time, the difference between them was not statistically significant. Fusion rates were comparable between the groups at 12 months, with BG cage showing a slightly higher early fusion rate at 6 months. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of complications.
Conclusions:
Both allograft and BG cages are effective in ACDF surgeries for cervical degenerative disc disease, with both contributing to substantial postoperative improvements. Differences in disc height, interspinous motion, and subsidence were not significant in the last follow-up, indicating both materials' suitability for clinical use. Future research with a larger cohort and longer follow-up is needed to confirm these preliminary findings.
