Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32726302›Full record

ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2020

Analysis of Cervical Sagittal Balance in Treating Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: 1-Level Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion Versus 2-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

Pinghui Zhou, Lujie Zong, Qian Wu, Yuchen Ye, Zhili Zhang, Huilin Yang, Changchun Zhang, Shenghao Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Pinghui ZhouDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Bengbu, Anhui, China (mainland).
Lujie ZongDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, China (mainland).
Qian WuDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, China (mainland).
Yuchen YeDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Bengbu, Anhui, China (mainland).
Zhili ZhangDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Bengbu, Anhui, China (mainland).
Huilin YangDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, China (mainland).
Changchun ZhangDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Bengbu, Anhui, China (mainland).
Shenghao WangDepartment of Orthopedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, China (mainland).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND Anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF), together with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) are both effective clinical treatments for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Cervical sagittal balance is critical to preserving normal alignment, and is also associated with clinical outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed patients who had suffered from CSM and had undergone 1-level ACCF or 2-level ACDF surgery between December 2016 and November 2017. Forty-eight patients were identified: 25 in the ACDF group and 23 in the ACCF group. All patients received follow-up for more than 12 months. The demographic data, radiographic parameters, and clinical efficacy were compared between and within groups, both pre- and postoperatively. RESULTS Both groups acquired good clinical efficacy; both Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores improved significantly. At the final follow-up visit, patients in the ACCF and ACDF groups did not differ significantly in C2-C7 Sagittal Vertebral Axis (cSVA), T1 Pelvic Angle (TPA), Neck Tilt (NT), Thoracic Inlet Angle (TIA), JOA, or NDI scores. However, the ACDF group had a significantly larger Cobb angle and T1 Slope (T1S) than the ACCF group. The postoperative Cobb angle increased significantly only in the ACDF group, while postoperative T1S significantly increased in both ACCF and ACDF groups. CONCLUSIONS Anterior cervical surgery may change the sagittal balance in terms of T1S or Cobb angle. No significant difference was found between ACCF and ACDF in clinical outcomes or representative global sagittal parameters. ACDF achieved more lordosis improvement than ACCF, with higher T1S. Surgeons need to pay extra attention to cervical sagittal balance, rather than focusing solely on decompression.

Indexed as

AgedCervical VertebraeDiskectomyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeRetrospective StudiesSpinal Cord DiseasesSpinal FusionSpondylosisTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID32726302
PMCPMC7414527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.