SynthesisMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2015
Comparison of Hybrid Surgery Incorporating Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion and Artificial Arthroplasty versus Multilevel Fusion for Multilevel Cervical Spondylosis: A Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Different Center of Rotation Trajectories after Cervical Hybrid Surgery: A Minimum 7-Year Retrospective Comparison of Bryan and Mobi-C Prostheses.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Anterior cervical hybrid constructs reduce superior adjacent segment burden compared to multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2024Article
- Article
- A real-world analysis of hybrid CDA and ACDF compared to multilevel ACDF.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Observational
- Anterior hybrid construction of multilevel cervical disc disease and spondylotic spinal stenosis: surgical results and factors affecting adjacent segment problems.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2021Article
- Intervertebral range of motion characteristics of normal cervical spinal segments (C0-T1) during in vivo neck motions.Journal of biomechanics · 2020Article
- Commentary: Utilization Trends of Cervical Disk Replacement in the United States.Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.) · 2018Article
- Preoperative T1 Slope as a Predictor of Change in Cervical Alignment and Range of Motion After Cervical Disc Arthroplasty.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2017Article
- Clinical and Radiological Analysis of Bryan Cervical Artificial Disc Replacement for "Skip" Multi-Segment Cervical Spondylosis: Long-Term Follow-Up Results.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Few studies have reported the safety and efficacy of hybrid surgery (HS), and some of the studies comparing HS with ACDF have reported conflicting results. We conducted this meta-analysis to clarify the advantages of HS in the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Medline, and CNKI to identify relevant controlled trials published up to October 2015. The standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of the perioperative parameters, visual analogue scale pain score (VAS), neck disability index (NDI), and range of motion (ROM) of C2-C7 and adjacent segments were calculated. We also analyzed complications and Odom scale scores using risk difference (RD) and 95% CI. RESULTS In total, 7 studies were included. The pooled data exhibited significant differences in blood loss between the 2 groups. However, there was no evidence indicating significant differences in operation time, complications, VAS, NDI, or Odom scale scores. Compared with the ACDF group, the HS group exhibited significantly protected C2-C7 ROM and reduced adjacent-segment ROM. CONCLUSIONS The safety of HS may be as good as that of ACDF. Furthermore, HS is superior to ACDF in conserving cervical spine ROM and decreasing adjacent-segment ROM. However, the results should be accepted cautiously due to the limitations of the study. Studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are required to confirm and update the results of the present study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.