ArticleAsian spine journal2022
Thorough Comparative Analysis of Stand-Alone Cage and Anterior Cervical Plate for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of Cervical Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Zero-profile anchored spacer versus conventional plate-cage construct in bilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Pooled it
- Self-locking stand-alone cage versus cage-plate fixation in monosegmental anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with a minimum 2-year follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Pooled it
- Single Level Cervical Radiculopathy with and without Fusion Technique: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2026Article
- [Single Level Cervical Radiculopathy with and without Fusion Technique: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis].Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2026Article
- Influence of cage material, plating and vertebral bone quality on subsidence and long-term outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion-a retrospective analysis.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Comparison of fusion, arthroplasty and hybrid surgery outcomes in patients with two-level cervical disc disease.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2024Article
- Stand-Alone Anchored Spacer vs Anterior Plate Construct in the Management of Adjacent Segment Disease after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.Global spine journal · 2024Review
- Vertebral Body Sliding Osteotomy as a Surgical Strategy for the Treatment of Cervical Myelopathy: Complications and Pitfalls.Neurospine · 2023Article
- Article
- Is anterior cervical plating necessary for cage constructs in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery for cervical degenerative disorders? Evidence-based on the systematic overview of meta-analyses.World neurosurgery: X · 2023Review
- Early outcomes of stand-alone cage anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A comparative analysis with cage-plate fixation in a developing spine practice.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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to thoroughly describe and objectively compare the efficacy of anterior cervical plate (ACP) and stand-alone cage (SAC). Although recognized as an effective procedure for cervical degenerative disease (CDD), a debate between the methods of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion exists. ACP provides stability to the fusion construct; however, some complications have been reported, such as dysphagia, adjacent disc disease, and soft tissue injury. To overcome these complications, a SAC was later introduced. A systematic search was conducted on the basis of PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines to identify relevant studies through PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane database. A total of 14 studies (960 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Twenty outcomes were clinically and radiologically compared between the two procedures. ACP and SAC were comparable in terms of dysphasia rate, loss of segmental angle, loss of disc height, the Odom criteria, Robinson's criteria, hospital stay, Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, Neck Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale, and fusion time. However, SAC was superior in terms of shorter operation time, less blood loss, lower dysphagia rate, and lower rate of adjacent level disease, whereas ACP was advantageous in terms of lower subsidence rate, better maintenance of the cervical global and segmental angles and disc height, and higher fusion rate. Both procedures can be used in patients with CDD, although it might be more beneficial to choose ACP in patients with multi-level pathologies, wherein better mechanical stability is provided. However, SAC may be more beneficial to use in patients with comorbidities, anemia, or swelling problems because it offers lower complication rates.
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.