Abstract:[Objective] To compare the clinical consequence of large channel endoscopic keyhole technique, (LCEKT) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for single-level cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR). [Methods] A retrospective study was performed on 46 patients who underwent surgical treatment for CSR in our hospital from December 2020 to September 2023. According to preoperative doctor-patient communication, 21 patients received LCEKT, while other 25 patients underwent ACDF. The documents regarding perioperative period, follow-up and images were compared between the two groups. [Results] The operation was successfully completed in both groups. The LCEKT group was proved significantly superior to the ACDF group in terms of operative time [(78.4±10.1) min vs (93.4± 9.6) min, P<0.001], intraoperative blood loss [(13.2±5.2) mL vs (52.4±7.6) mL, P<0.001], incision length [(0.8±0.1) cm vs (5.1±0.2) cm, P< 0.001], intraoperative fluoroscopy times [(4.2±0.5) vs (6.7±1.2), P<0.001] ambulation time [(15.7±6.5) days vs (34.6±3.7) days, P<0.001] and hospital stay [(5.6±1.0) days vs (9.3±1.3) days, P<0.001]. With time of the follow-up period lasted for (13.6±0.8) months in a mean, the neck pain VAS, upper limb pain VAS, NDI and JOA scores were significantly improved in both groups (P<0.05). Except that the neck VAS score in the LCEKT group [(2.3±0.6) vs (3.5±0.7), P<0.001] was significantly better than that in the ACDF group 1 week after surgery, there was no statistical significance in the abovesaid indexes between the two groups at any time points accordingly (P>0.05). Regarding imaging, the postoperative cervical lordosis angle and vertebral canal occupancy rate were significantly improved in both groups compared with those preoperative (P<0.05). The cervical range of motion (ROM) and intervertebral height remained unchanged in the LCEKT group (P>0.05), whereas the intervertebral height in ACDF group was significantly increased postoperatively compared with that preoperatively (P<0.05). Although there was no statistical significance in the above imaging parameters between the two groups before surgery (P>0.05), the LCEKT group had significantly less cervical lordosis angle [(12.6±2.3)° vs (15.7±2.5)°, P<0.001] and intervertebral height [(5.4±0.5) mm vs (7.5± 0.7) mm, P<0.001], whereas significantly greater cervical ROM [(44.0±5.7)° vs (38.4±5.6)°, P=0.002] than the ACDF group at the latest follow-up. [Conclusion] Both surgical techniques do achieve good clinical results in the treatment of CSR. By comparison, the LCEKT has the advantages of less trauma, less bleeding, faster recovery, and preserving cervical segmental motion over the ACDF. In addition, the large-channel endoscopic system provides the surgeon with a broader view field and more flexible operating space to improve operative efficiency and reduce surgical risk.