SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2020
Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior cervical foraminotomy for the treatment of single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Posterior cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical discectomy for Cervical Brachialgia: the FORVAD RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2023Trial
- Evaluating Three-Dimensional Navigation versus Conventional Fluoroscopy for Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy: An Exploratory Cohort Comparison.Journal of neurological surgery. Part A, Central European neurosurgery · 2026Article
- Retrospective cohort study of recovery trajectories following anterior versus posterior fusion surgery for cervical degenerative pathology.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Full-Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Decompression Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Global spine journal · 2026Review
- High rates of spin bias in systematic reviews regarding anterior cervical discectomy and fusionJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Review
- [Single Level Cervical Radiculopathy with and without Fusion Technique: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis].Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2026Article
- Single Level Cervical Radiculopathy with and without Fusion Technique: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2026Article
- Short-Term Differences in Hospital Resource Utilization and Quality of Care Between Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion and Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy: A National Propensity-Scored Observational Study Utilizing the ACS-NSQIP Database.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Safety and efficacy of cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for 1-2 level radiculopathy.Surgical neurology international · 2025Article
- Comparison of Load-Sharing Responses Between Graded Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy and Conventional Fusion Using Finite Element Modeling.Journal of engineering and science in medical diagnostics and therapy · 2024Article
- Evolution of Cervical Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Current Progress and Future Directions-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Fully endoscopic cervical spine surgery: What does the future hold?Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2021Review
- Minimally invasive cervical laminoforaminotomy - Technique and outcomes.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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the effectiveness and safety of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) for patients diagnosed with single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy.
methodsRelevant studies comparing ACDF with PCF for cervical radiculopathy were searched in an electronic database. After data extraction and quality assessment of included studies, a meta-analysis was done by using the RevMan 5.3 software. The random effects model was used if there was heterogeneity between studies; otherwise, the fixed effects model was used.
resultsA total of 3 randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 12 retrospective studies including 52705 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and patients' satisfaction (P > 0.05) between treatment groups. The complication rate of the PCF group was equivalent compared with the ACDF group (P = 0.60), but the reoperation rate following PCF was on the higher side (P = 0.02). Data analysis also showed that the PCF group was associated with shorter operation time (P = 0.001) and shorter length of hospital stay (P = 0.002).
conclusionsAmong patients with single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy, PCF has comparable effectiveness and complication rate compared with ACDF. It seems that PCF is a sufficient alternative procedure with shorter operation time, shorter length of hospital stay, and less total hospital cost for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. However, the higher reoperation rate following PCF should be also taken into consideration.
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.