ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2018
Motion analysis of dynamic cervical implant stabilization versus anterior discectomy and fusion: a retrospective analysis of 70 cases.
Article in 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, 2018. 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, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of new assembled titanium mesh cage on the improvement in biomechanical performance of single-level anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion: a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Biomechanical evaluation of the novel assembled internal fixed system in C2-C3 anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a finite element analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Biomechanical Effects of a Novel Anatomic Titanium Mesh Cage for Single-Level Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- In vivo intervertebral kinematics and disc deformations of the human cervical spine during walking.Medical engineering & physics · 2021Article
- Intervertebral range of motion characteristics of normal cervical spinal segments (C0-T1) during in vivo neck motions.Journal of biomechanics · 2020Article
- Adjacent segment motion following multi-level ACDF: a kinematic and clinical study in patients with zero-profile anchored spacer or plate.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 · 2019Article
- The Michel Benoist and Robert Mulholland yearly European Spine Journal review: a survey of the "surgical and research" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2018.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 · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeRetrospective kinematic analysis of treated level, adjacent levels, and overall cervical spine after single-level dynamic cervical implant (DCI) stabilization versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).
methodsBetween June 2009 and March 2013, 70 consecutive patients with a symptomatic single-level cervical degenerative disk disease (DDD) were enrolled in this study and divided into DCI (n = 35) group and ACDF (n = 35) group. All cases were followed up for more than 5 years. The study compared perioperative parameters; clinical outcomes; and radiological parameters. Kinematic analysis included range of motion (ROM) of treated level and adjacent level, overall ROM (C2-C7), and changes in adjacent disk spaces.
resultsThere were no significant differences between the DCI group and ACDF group in terms of improvement in the SF-36, VAS, NDI, and JOA scores. DCI stabilization resulted in better ROM of C2-C7 and the treated level than ACDF did. The ROM of treated level decreased significantly at 24 months after surgery and last follow-up in the DCI group, and the C2-C7 ROM showed different degrees of reduction after the 24 months after surgery. Radiological evidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) at last follow-up was observed in 4/22 patients (18.2%) in the DCI group and 5/23 patients (21.7%) in the ACDF group which was not a significant difference between groups (p > 0.05).
conclusionsDCI stabilization for the treatment of cervical DDD cannot preserve the normal kinematics of the cervical spine for a long time, especially the treated level. DCI stabilization cannot decrease the risk of ASD compared with ACDF. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
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.