Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34966859›Full record

ArticleSpine surgery and related research2021

How Should We Grade Cervical Disk Degeneration? A Comparison of Two Popular Classification Systems.

Lukas Urbanschitz, Susanne Bensler, Sascha Merat, Christopher G Lenz, Karim Eid

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Approach to assess the effect of sagittal cervical alignment on three-dimensional movement of the cervical spine in spondylosis patients.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 · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Effect of Long-Term Smoking on Cervical Disc Degeneration: A Retrospective Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Preoperative three-dimensional simulation and clinical evaluation ofQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025
    Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Lukas UrbanschitzDepartment of Spine Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
Susanne BenslerDepartment of Radiology, Cantonal Hospital Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
Sascha MeratDepartment of Radiology, Cantonal Hospital Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
Christopher G LenzDepartment of Orthopaedics, Cantonal Hospital Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
Karim EidDepartment of Orthopaedics, Cantonal Hospital Baden, Baden, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite being originally developed for the evaluation of lumbar disk degeneration, the Pfirrmann classification has emerged as the most popular classification system for cervical disk degeneration. However, with the Suzuki classification, a new classification system that is specifically tailored for the evaluation of cervical disk disease was introduced. In this study, we aim to evaluate differences in inter- and intraobserver reliability of both classifications in a head-to-head comparison.

methodsIn total, we have evaluated 120 cervical disks within 40 patients via magnetic resonance imaging according to the Pfirrmann and Suzuki classification. The degree of disk degeneration was evaluated by two independent musculoskeletal radiologists. After 6 months, the classification was reassessed to evaluate the intraobserver reliability. The inter- and intraobserver reliabilities were then calculated using Cohen's kappa.

resultsThe inter- and intraobserver reliability provided a significant agreement between all ratings in Pfirrmann as well as the Suzuki classification (p>0.001). The interobserver reliability was determined to be fair in both the Suzuki classification (κ=0.290) and the Pfirrmann classification (κ=0.265). The intraobserver reliability was substantial in the Suzuki classification (κ=0.798), while it was almost perfect in the Pfirrmann classification (κ=0.858).

conclusionsAlthough not designed for the evaluation of cervical disk degeneration, the Pfirrmann classification yielded equal inter- and higher intraobserver reliability. Both classification systems are viable options for the grading of cervical disk degeneration. While the Pfirrmann classification has the advantage of being better established, the Suzuki classification may be clinically superior due to a better representation of cervical disk degeneration and the consideration of disk bulging for the classification of cervical disk degeneration.

Indexed as

cervical classificationcervical disk degenerationPfirrmannreliabilitySuzuki

Identifiers

PMID34966859
PMCPMC8668218

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.