ArticleNeurosurgery2021
Occurrence, Risk Factors, and Time Trends for Late Reoperations due to Degenerative Cervical Spine Disease: A Finnish National Register Study of 19 377 Patients Operated on Between 1999 and 2015.
Article in Neurosurgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cervical curvature changes and neurological outcomes following non-fusion surgery for cervical space-occupying lesions in adults: a multicenter retrospective study.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
- Chinese Patent Medicines for Cervical Spondylosis: A Comprehensive Review and Current Status of Clinical Research.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
- The Finnish spine register (FinSpine): development, design, validation and utility.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 · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgery for degenerative cervical spine disease has escalated since the 1990s. Fusion has become the mainstay of surgery despite concerns regarding adjacent segment degeneration. The patient-specific trends in reoperations have not been studied previously.
objectiveTo analyze the occurrence, risk factors, and trends in reoperations in a long-term follow-up of all the patients operated for degenerative cervical spine disease in Finland between 1999 and 2015.
methodsThe patients were retrospectively identified from the Hospital Discharge Registry. Reoperations were traced individually; only reoperations occurring >365 d after the primary operation were included. Time trends in reoperations and the risk factors were analyzed by regression analysis.
resultsOf the 19 377 identified patients, 9.2% underwent a late reoperation at a median of 3.6 yr after the primary operation. The annual risk of reoperation was 2.4% at 2 yr, 6.6% at 5 yr, 11.1% at 10 yr, and 14.2% at 15 yr. Seventy-five percent of the late reoperations occurred within 6.5 yr of the primary operation. Foraminal stenosis, the anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) technique, male gender, weak opiate use, and young age were the most important risk factors for reoperation. There was no increase in the risk of reoperations over the follow-up period.
conclusionThe risk of reoperation was stable between 1999 and 2015. The reoperation risk was highest during the first 6 postoperative years and then declined. Patients with foraminal stenosis had the highest risk of reoperation, especially when ACDF was performed.
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.