ArticleNeurosurgery2022
Early Outcomes of Elective Anterior Cervical Diskectomy and Fusion for Degenerative Spine Disease Correlate With the Specialty of the Surgeon Performing the Procedure.
Article in Neurosurgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Influence of Surgeon Specialty on 30-day Outcomes Following Single-Level Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Specialty Impact on Patient Outcomes: Paving a Way for an Integrated Approach to Spinal Disorders.Cureus · 2023Review
- Orthopedic surgery versus neurosurgery: Prevalence and surgical detail assessment of adult spinal fusion procedures.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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComparative effectiveness research has a vital role in recent health reform and policies. Specialty training is one of these provider-side variables, and surgeons who were trained in different specialties may have different outcomes on performing the same procedure.
objectiveTo investigate the impact of spine surgeon specialty (neurosurgery vs orthopedic surgery) on early perioperative outcome measures of elective anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative spine diseases.
methodsThis was a retrospective, 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort study. In total, 21 211 patients were reviewed from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Propensity score matching and subgroup analysis were performed.
resultsIn both groups (single-level/multilevel ACDF), patients operated on by neurosurgeons had longer operation time (133 vs 104 min/164 vs 138 min), shorter total hospital stay (24 vs 41 h/25 vs 46 h), and lower rates of return to operating room (0.7% vs 2.1%/0.6% vs 2.4%), nonhome discharge (1.2% vs 4.6%/1.0% vs 4.9%), discharge after postoperative day 1 (6.7% vs 11.9%/10.1% vs 18.9%), perioperative blood transfusion (0.4% vs 2.1%/0.6% vs 3.1%), and sepsis (0.2% vs 0.7%/0.1% vs 0.7%; P < .05). In the single-level ACDF group, patients operated on by neurosurgeons had lower readmission (1.9% vs 4.1%) and unplanned intubation rates (0.1% vs 1.1%; P < .05). Other outcome measures and mortality rates were similar among the 2 cohorts in both groups.
conclusionOur analysis found significant differences in early perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing ACDF by neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons. These differences might have significant clinical and cost implications for patients, physicians, program directors, payers, and health systems.
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.