Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27281067›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2016

Laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical compressive myelopathy: A meta-analysis.

Mengyue Huang, Xuemei Gao, Jingliang Cheng, Jing Han, Jingjing Liu

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 28 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Intervertebral disc degeneration.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Cervical kyphosis after posterior cervical laminectomy with and without fusion.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mengyue HuangDepartment of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
Xuemei GaoDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Key Clinical Laboratory of Henan Province, Zhengzhou, China.
Jingliang ChengDepartment of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
Jing HanDepartment of Pathology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
Jingjing LiuDepartment of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6751-7993
International Paper (United States) · USFirst Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This is a meta-analysis to compare the results between laminoplasty and laminectomy followed by fusion for the patients with multilevel cervical compressive myelopathy. An extensive search of literature was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane library, CNKI, and WANFANG. The following outcome measures were extracted: the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, cervical curvature index (CCI), visual analog scale (VAS), cervical lordosis (C2-7), complications, blood loss, and operation time. Data analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3 and STATA 12.0. A total of 23 studies comprising 774 and 743 patients treated with laminoplasty and laminectomy followed by fusion, respectively, were included in the final analysis. The pooled analysis showed that there was no significant difference in preoperative JOA scores [P = 0.89], postoperative JOA scores [P = 0.13], JOA scores improvement rate [P = 0.27], preoperative CCI [P = 0.15], postoperative CCI [P = 0.14], preoperative VAS [P = 0.41], postoperative VAS [P = 0.52], preoperative cervical lordosis (C2-7) [P = 0.46], postoperative cervical lordosis (C2-7) [P = 0.67], total complications [P = 0.07], axial pain [P = 0.94], and blood loss [P = 0.51]. However, there were significant difference in operation time (WMD = -19.57 [-32.11, -7.02], P = 0.002) and C5 palsy (OR = 0.26 [0.15, 0.44], P < 0.001). As compared with laminectomy followed by fusion, expansive laminoplasty showed no significant differences in JOA scores, CCI, ROM, VAS, cervical lordosis (C2-7), axial pain, total complications, and blood loss, but shorter operation time and fewer C5 palsy.

Indexed as

Cervical VertebraeHumansLaminectomyLaminoplastySpinal Cord CompressionTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID27281067
PMCPMC4907645
OpenAlexW2474259335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.