SynthesisMedicine2020
Total disc replacement compared with fusion for cervical degenerative disc disease: A systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single-Level Cervical Disc Replacement Using a PEEK-on-Ceramic Implant: Results of a Multicenter FDA IDE Trial With 24-Month Follow-up.International journal of spine surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designThe present study was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement.
objectiveThe present study aimed to conduct a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses comparing ACDR with fusion for treating CDDD in order to assist decision makers in their selection among conflicting meta-analyses and to provide treatment recommendations based on the best available evidence. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although several meta-analyses have been performed to compare total disc replacement (TDR) and fusion for treating cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD), their findings are inconsistent.
methodsMultiple databases were comprehensively searched for meta-analyses comparing TDR with fusion for treating CDDD. The meta-analyses that comprised only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Two authors independently assessed the meta-analysis study quality and extracted the data. The Jadad decision algorithm was used to ascertain which meta-analysis studies represented the best evidence.
resultsA total of 14 meta-analysis studies were included. All these studies only included RCTs and were determined as Level-II evidence.
conclusionsCervical disc arthroplasty was superior compared to anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease.
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.