Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35281345›Full record

ArticlePain research & management2022

Classification and Treatment for Cervical Spine Fracture with Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Clinical Nomogram Prediction Study.

Nana Shen, Xiaolin Wu, Zhu Guo, Shuai Yang, Chang Liu, Zhaoyang Guo, Shang-You Yang, Dongming Xing, Bohua Chen, Hongfei Xiang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pain research & management, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. [Transosseous lacerations in the ankylosed cervical spine].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

10 authors.

Nana ShenDepartment of Rehabilitation, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao 266000, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2137-3733
Xiaolin WuDepartment of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao 266003, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6200-7000
Zhu GuoDepartment of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao 266003, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6044-5357
Shuai YangDepartment of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao 266003, China.
Chang LiuDepartment of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao 266003, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3085-4202
Zhaoyang GuoDepartment of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao 266003, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3869-4170
Shang-You YangDepartment of Orthopedics, University of Kansas, School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS 67214, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8835-5302
Dongming XingCancer Institute, The Qingdao University, Qingdao 266003, China.
Bohua ChenDepartment of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao 266003, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5400-4352
Hongfei XiangDepartment of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao 266003, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5026-5918

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Through the follow-up analysis of cervical spine fracture cases with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), a treatment-oriented fracture classification method is introduced to evaluate the clinical efficacy guided by this classification method. Method: A retrospective analysis was performed on 128 AS patients who underwent comprehensive treatment in the Spine Surgery Department of Qingdao University Hospital from January 2009 to May 2018. Statistics of patient demographic data, distribution of different fractures corresponding to surgical methods, 3-year follow-up outcomes, and summary of objective fracture classification methods were analyzed. A prospective 5-year follow-up study of 90 patients with AS cervical spine fractures from June 2015 to August 2020 was also included. Statistical differences on the distribution of factors such as case information, cervical spine sagittal sequence parameters, and fracture classification were assessed. Correlations between surgical information, American Spinal Injuries Association grade (ASIA), modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores (mJOA), and other factors were analyzed to establish a nomogram predictive model for curative effect outcomes. Overall, three major types and the four subtypes of AS cervical spine fractures were evaluated based on the clinical efficacy of the classification and the selection of surgical treatment methods. Result: The most common type of fracture was type II (30 cases, 33.33%), most of the subtypes were A (37 cases), followed by B (36 cases) and C (17 cases). Twenty-four of 28 patients with type I underwent anterior surgery, and 47 of 62 patients with type II and III underwent posterior surgery. The average follow-up time was 25.76 ± 11.80 months. The results of predicting clinical variables are different but include factors such as fracture type and subtype, type of operation, and age. The predictor variables include the above-mentioned similar variables, but survival is more affected by the fracture type of the patient. Conclusion: This predictive model based on follow-up information delineation points out the impact of ankylosing spondylitis cervical spine fracture classification on surgical selection and clinical efficacy.

Indexed as

Spinal FracturesSpondylitis, AnkylosingCervical VertebraeFollow-Up StudiesHumansNomogramsProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID35281345
PMCPMC8916892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.