SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2022
Cost-effectiveness of anterior surgical decompression surgery for cervical degenerative disk disease: a systematic review of economic evaluations.
Synthesis in 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, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of posterior versus anterior surgery for cervical radiculopathy: results from a multicentre randomised non-inferiority trial (FACET).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 · 2024Trial
- Predictors of surgical site infection after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in a national administrative database.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
- Restoration of Range of Motion in the Cervical Spine through Single-Segment Artificial Disc Replacement Using the BagueraJournal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Advocating uniformity in spine surgery: a practical disease-specific guideline for trial-based economic evaluations.BMJ open · 2023Article
- A novel nanohydroxyapatite/polyamide-66 cage for reducing the subsidence rate after single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a comparative study of 7-year follow-up.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNo clear consensus exists on which anterior surgical technique is most cost-effective for treating cervical degenerative disk disease (CDDD). One of the most common treatment options is anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF). Anterior cervical discectomy with arthroplasty (ACDA) was developed in an effort to reduce the incidence of clinical adjacent segment pathology and associated additional surgeries by preserving motion. This systematic review aims to evaluate the evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of anterior surgical decompression techniques used to treat radiculopathy and/or myelopathy caused by CDDD.
methodsThe search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, EconLit, NHS-EED and the Cochrane Library. Studies were included if healthcare costs and utility or effectivity measurements were mentioned.
resultsA total of 23 studies were included out of the 1327 identified studies. In 9 of the 13 studies directly comparing ACDA and ACDF, ACDA was the most cost-effective technique, with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio ranging from $2.900/QALY to $98.475/QALY. There was great heterogeneity between the costs of due to different in- and exclusion criteria of costs and charges, cost perspective, baseline characteristics, and calculation methods. The methodological quality of the included studies was moderate.
conclusionThe majority of studies report ACDA to be a more cost-effective technique in comparison with ACDF. The lack of uniform literature impedes any solid conclusions to be drawn. There is a need for high-quality cost-effectiveness research and uniformity in the conduct, design and reporting of economic evaluations concerning the treatment of CDDD.
trial registrationPROSPERO Registration: CRD42020207553 (04.10.2020).
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.