SynthesisMedicine2019
Anterior decompression and fusion versus laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy due to ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anterior cervical decompression improves medial plantar pressure in OPLL with gait disturbance: a 24-month retrospective cohort study.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- An Algorithmic Posterior Approach to the Treatment of Multilevel Degenerative Cervical Spine Disease: A Multicenter Prospective Study.International journal of spine surgery · 2022Article
- Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy with Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament: Which Is the Most Suitable Surgical Procedure? A Technical Note.Spine surgery and related research · 2021Article
- Article
- An Age-old Debate: Anterior Versus Posterior Surgery for Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament.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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBoth anterior decompression and fusion (ADF) and laminoplasty (LAMP) are frequently used for the treatment of cervical myelopathy due to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). However, some controversies still remained in surgical options. We investigated whether ADF had better neurological outcome than LAMP in the treatment of cervical myelopathy due to OPLL. Secondary outcomes included operation time, blood loss, rate of complication and reoperation.
methodsPubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials database were searched to identify potential clinical studies compared ADF with LAMP for treatment of cervical myelopathy owing to OPLL. We also manually searched the reference lists of articles and reviews for possible relevant studies. Quality assessment was performed according to Cochrane Handbook and meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 12.0 software.
resultsNine studies involving 712 patients were finally included in this analysis. Compared with LAMP, ADF was associated with an increase of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score (WMD = 1.86, 95% CI 0.43 to 3.29, P = .011) and recovery JOA score at final follow-up (WMD = 30.94, 95% CI 20.56 to 41.33, P = .000). And, ADF was associated with a decrease of the late neurologic deterioration than LAMP group (RR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.92, P = .003). However, ADF was associated with an increase of the postoperative cervical lordosis (WMD = 4.47, 95% CI 1.58 to 7.36, P = .002) than LAMP. There was no significant difference between the complication, reoperation rate (P > .05). What's more, ADF was associated with an increase of the operation time than LAMP (P < .05).
conclusionsADF yields better neurological improvement, but higher cervical lordosis and longer operation time compared with LAMP for cervical myelopathy caused by OPLL. No significant difference was found in the complication and re-operation rate.
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.