ArticleKorean Journal of Spine2017
Comparison of Cervical Alignment and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Os Odontoideum versus Non-Os Odontoideum after Atlantoaxial Fixation.
Article in Korean Journal of Spine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of extending expansive open-door laminoplasty to C1 and C2 on cervical sagittal parameters.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
- Independent Correlation of the C1-2 Cobb Angle With Patient-Reported Outcomes After Correcting Chronic Atlantoaxial Instability.Neurospine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the effect of atlantoaxial fixation on cervical alignment and clinical outcomes in patients with os odontoideum (OO) versus non-os odontoideum (non-OO).
methodsA total of 119 patients who underwent atlantoaxial fixation for instability were identified between January 1998 and January 2014. Inclusion criteria included age more than 21 years and diagnosis of OO and non-OO. There were 22 OO patients, and 20 non-OO patients. Measuring the Oc-C1 Cobb angle, C1-2 Cobb angle, C2-7 Cobb angle, and C2-7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA) was assessed. Clinical outcome was assessment of suboccipital pain was determined using a visual analogue scale (VAS), and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores were obtained in all patients pre- and postoperatively.
resultsThe preoperative C1-2 angle in the OO group (26.02°±10.53°) was significantly higher than the non-OO group (p=0.04). After C1-2 fixation, the OO group had significantly higher kyphotic change in the C1-2 angle (ΔC1-2) (3.2°±7.3° [OO] vs. -1.46°±7.21° [non-OO]) (p=0.04), and higher decrease in postoperative C2-7 SVA (ΔC2-7 SVA) (5.64±11.56 mm [OO] vs. -0.51± 6.57 mm [non-OO]) (p=0.04). Both groups showed improvements in the health related quality of life (HRQOL) after surgery based on the VAS and JOA score (p<0.001).
conclusionAfter fixation, kyphotic angular change in atlantoaxial joint and decrease C2-7 SVA were marked in the OO group. Both the OO and non-OO groups improved in neurological function and outcome after surgery.
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.