Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35273112›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2022

2-Level Anterior Cervical Arthrodesis With Integrated Spacer and Plate vs Traditional Anterior Spacer and Plate System.

Harjot Thind, Angela Beliveau Aura, Paul Lee, Peter Shen, Chin-Shang Li, Eric O Klineberg, Kee D Kim, Ripul R Panchal

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Three-Dimensional Printed Anterior Cervical Standalone Combined Cage-Plate-300 Consecutive Medical Implants.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2025
    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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Harjot ThindDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California, USA.
Angela Beliveau AuraDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California, USA.
Paul LeeDepartment of Neuroradiology, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California, USA.
Peter ShenDepartment of Neuroradiology, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California, USA.
Chin-Shang LiDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Division of Biostatistics, University of California Davis, Davis, California, USA.
Eric O KlinebergDepartment of Orthopedics, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California, USA.
Kee D KimDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California, USA.
Ripul R PanchalAmerican Neurospine Institute, PLLC, Plano, Texas, USA ripulpanchal@gmail.com.
University of California Davis Medical Center · USNeuroSpine Institute · USUniversity of California, Davis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common surgery to treat cervical degenerative disc disease. Use of an anterior spacer and plate system (ASPS) results in increased disc height, higher fusion rate, lower subsidence rate, and lower complication rate than a spacer alone.1,2 However, anterior cervical plating is associated with complications, such as dysphagia, plate-screw dislodgment, soft tissue injury, neural injury, and esophageal perforation.3-9 To potentially reduce these drawbacks, integrated spacer and plate (ISP) systems have gained popularity.

methodsFrom November 2009 to October 2013, a total of 84 consecutive patients who underwent 2-level ACDF using ISP or ASPS were reviewed for clinical and radiographic outcomes. Patient-reported visual analog scale (VAS) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores, fusion rates, and hardware failure were determined at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery.

resultsForty-three patients received ISP and 41 patients received ASPS. There were no significant differences in patient demographics between the 2 groups. Perioperative characteristics were similar, except for operative time. Postoperatively, no significant differences in VAS or NDI scores or fusion status were found. At the proximal surgical level only, there was a trend toward an earlier observed radiographic fusion rate in ASPS vs ISP, but this finding was not statistically significant (

conclusionsThe ISP system for 2-level ACDF compared to traditional ASPS has comparable clinical and radiographic outcomes up to 2 years postoperatively. There may be a trend toward an earlier observed radiographic fusion in the ASPS group, but there was no difference in long-term dysphagia rate. CLINICAL RELAVANCE: Integrated spacer and traditional anterior spacer for 2-level ACDF has similar clinical and radiographical outcome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:

Indexed as

anterior cervical spine fusionfusion rateintegrated plate and spacertraditional anterior spacer and platezero-profile cage

Identifiers

PMID35273112
PMCPMC9930658
OpenAlexW4220965678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.