ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2018
Length of stay associated with posterior cervical fusion with intervertebral cages: experience from a device registry.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of interventions and outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 2456 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis cases.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 · 2021Pooled it
- Minimally Invasive Decompression and Fusion With Percutaneous Facet Cages vs Traditional Lateral Mass Screw Fixation for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Retrospective Comparative Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Prehabilitation and preoperative exercise in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: a systematic review.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 · 2026Review
- Safety and efficacy of minimally invasive posterior cervical fusion: a single center, single surgeon retrospective review.Journal of surgical case reports · 2024Article
- Clinical Implementation of Tissue-Sparing Posterior Cervical Fusion: Addressing Market Access Challenges.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Minimally Invasive Posterior Cervical Fusion: A Handsome Option.Acta neurochirurgica. Supplement · 2023Article
- Robotic-guided placement of cervical pedicle screws: feasibility and accuracy.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 · 2022Article
- Tissue-Sparing Posterior Cervical Fusion With Interfacet Cages: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Global spine journal · 2020Review
- Four-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior cervical fusion: Perioperative outcomes, complications, and sagittal alignment in multilevel cervical pathology.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUsing a multi-center medical device registry, we prospectively collected a set of perioperative and clinical outcomes among patients treated with tissue-sparing, posteriorly-placed intervertebral cage fusion used in the management of symptomatic, degenerative neural compressive disorders of the cervical spine.
methodsCervical fusion utilizing posteriorly-placed intervertebral cages offers a tissue-sparing alternative to traditional instrumentation for the treatment of symptomatic cervical radiculopathy. A registry was established to prospectively collect perioperative and clinical data in a real-world clinical practice setting for patients treated via this approach. This study evaluated length of stay as well as estimated blood loss and procedural time in 271 registry patients.
resultsThe median length of stay was 1.1, 1.1 and 1.2 days for patients having a stand-alone arthrodesis, revision of a pseudoarthrosis, and circumferential fusion (360°), respectively, and was not related to number of levels treated. Historical comparison to published literature demonstrated that average lengths of stay associated with open, posterior lateral mass fixation were consistently ≥4 days. Average blood loss (range, 32-75 mL) and procedural time (range, 51-88 min) were also diminished in patients having tissue-sparing, cervical intervertebral cage fusion compared to open posterior lateral mass fixation.
conclusionsAdoption of this tissue-sparing procedure may offer substantial cost-constraining benefits by reducing the length of post-operative hospitalization by, at least, 3 days compared to traditional lateral mass fixation.
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.