ArticleNeurospine2019
Comparing Allografts to Autografts for Maintenance of Cervical Sagittal Parameters and Clinical Outcomes Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With Anterior Cervical Plating.
Article in Neurospine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sagittal balance of the cervical spine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.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
- A nationwide registry study of surgical and patient-reported outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: Part 1 - Synthetic cages versus autologous crista bone grafts.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 · 2026Article
- Correlation analysis between preoperative odontoid incidence and clinical outcomes 2 years after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Analysis of Complications in Multilevel Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Using Osteobiologics Other than Bone Morphogenetic Protein: A Systematic Review.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Enhancing Bone Grafting Outcomes: A Comprehensive Review of Antibacterial Artificial Composite Bone Scaffolds.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Review
- Efficiency of minimal oblique resection of the uncinate process during an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.Medicine · 2021Article
- Comparison of the effectiveness and safety of bioactive glass ceramic to allograft bone for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with anterior plate fixation.Neurosurgical review · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCurrent literature has not shown if using either allograft or autograft differentially affects postoperative cervical sagittal parameters. The goal of this study was to compare sagittal alignment and patient-reported outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with allograft versus autograft.
methodsA retrospective cohort analysis of patients who underwent single-level ACDF was conducted. Preoperative, immediate postoperative, and final follow-up radiographic assessments were conducted and included: change in C2-7 lordosis, T1 slope, levels fused, sagittal vertical axis (SVA), fusion mass lordosis, and proximal and distal adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). Patient-reported outcomes were obtained using the Neck Disability Index and visual analogue scale scores for neck and arm.
resultsA total of 404 patients were assessed; 353 using allograft and 51 using autograft. No significant differences existed in demographics. Cervical lordosis improved in both groups without significant changes in SVA. Autograft group had a significantly greater amount of lordosis at the proximal segment on immediate postoperative radiographs and less overall cervical lordosis at final follow-up. Sagittal parameters were similar at each time point without significant changes between the 3-time points. No significant differences existed in radiographic ASD or reoperation rates. Fusion rates exceeded 96% in both groups. No significant differences existed between preoperative, postoperative, or change in patient-reported outcomes between the 2 groups.
conclusionSagittal alignment is maintained following ACDF when using either allograft or autograft. Radiographic evidence of ASD is present in both groups; however, this was not considered clinically significant, given low rates of pseudarthrosis or reoperation. No significant differences exist between groups in terms of patient-reported outcomes.
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.