SynthesisMedicine2018
Comparison of laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion in the treatment of multilevel cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical efficacy and complications of 10 surgical interventions for cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Pooled it
- Cervical laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion: An umbrella review of postoperative outcomes.Neurosurgical review · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of laminectomy and fusion vs laminoplasty in the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A meta-analysis.Medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Differential Impact of C2-7 Sagittal Vertical Axis on Postoperative Axial Symptoms in Laminoplasty vs Laminectomy With Fusion: A Propensity Score-Trimmed Retrospective Cohort Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Article
- Dynamic K-Line Status and Surgical Outcomes in Multilevel Cervical OPLL: A Multicenter Comparative Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Quantitative Investigation of the "K-Line Edge", a Clustered K-Line (±) Group Derived from K-Line Assessment in Patients with Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Effects of Preoperative Cervical Range of Motion on Clinical Outcomes Following Posterior Decompression: A Multicenter Study of Patients With Cervical Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament.Global spine journal · 2025Article
- Improved Function After Anterior Controllable Antedisplacement and Fusion for Cervical Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament: A Long-Term Follow-Up.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
- Cervical laminectomy and fusion versus laminoplasty in degenerative cervical myelopathy: A propensity score matching analysis.Surgical neurology international · 2025Article
- Radiographic characterization of OPLL progression in patients receiving laminoplasty with a minimum of two-years follow-up.Neurosurgical review · 2024Article
- 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 · 2024Article
- Comparative Analysis of Postoperative Sagittal Balance in Expansive Open-Door Laminoplasty versus Laminectomy with Fusion for Multilevel Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament: A Retrospective Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
- An Algorithmic Roadmap for the Surgical Management of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Narrative Review.Asian spine journal · 2024Article
- A Novel Posterior Compression Score System for Outcome Prediction in Laminoplasty Treated OPLL Patients: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Biomechanical evaluation on a new type of vertebral titanium porous mini-plate and mechanical comparison between cervical open-door laminoplasty and laminectomy: a finite element analysis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Article
- Laminoplasty versus laminectomy with fusion for treating multilevel degenerative cervical myelopathy.North American Spine Society journal · 2023Article
- Biomechanical evaluation of reconstruction of the posterior complex in restorative laminoplasty with miniplates.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaminoplasty (LP) and laminectomy with fusion (LF) were recognized as two reliable and effective way in treating multilevel cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). However, there was no clear conclusion on which method is better. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the clinical results between LP and LF in the treatment of multilevel cervical OPLL.
methodsAn extensive search of literature was performed in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane library, CNKI (Chinese database), and WANFANG (Chinese database). The following outcomes were extracted: the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores, visual analog scale (VAS), cervical lordosis, cervical range of motion (ROM), complications, blood loss, and operation time. Data analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3.
resultsA total of 11 studies were included in the final analysis. The results indicated that no significant differences between LP and LF group in terms of preoperative JOA scores (P = .58), postoperative JOA scores (P = .60), JOA scores improvement rate (P = 0.64), preoperative VAS (P = .34), postoperative VAS (P=.20), preoperative range of motion (ROM) (P = .10), postoperative ROM (P = .18), preoperative cervical lordosis (P = .56), C5 palsy (P = .16), and axial pain (P = .21). LF group showed larger postoperative cervical lordosis than LP group [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.13 (2.03, 0.24), P = .01]. However, LP group showed lower operation time [mean difference (MD) = 19.42 (26.87, 11.97), P < .001] and blood loss [MD = 94.78 (179.05, 10.51), P = .03] than LF group.
conclusionBoth LP and LF can achieve clinical improvement in the treatment of multilevel cervical OPLL. LF was superior to LP in maintaining cervical lordosis. However, LP showed lower surgical trauma than LF. Kyphosis line (K-line) may be a good criterion in the selection of posterior surgery. LP was performed for the patients with K-line (+) and LF for K-line (-).
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.