Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35324370›Full record

ReviewGlobal spine journal2022

Management of Cervical Spondylotic Radiculopathy: A Systematic review.

Huo Luyao, Yang Xiaoxiao, Feng Tianxiao, Li Yuandong, Ping Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Global spine journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
13.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Huo LuyaoOrthopedics department, 74770First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4208-1887
Yang XiaoxiaoJinan Vocational College of nursing, Jinan, China.
Feng TianxiaoOrthopedics department, 74770First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Li YuandongOrthopedics department, 74770First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Ping WangOrthopedics department, 74770First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNJinan Maternity And Care Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objective(1) To evaluate the effects of surgery and conservative treatments for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy and (2) provide reference for choosing the time and method of treatment.

methodsA literature search was performed using PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials from inception to September 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of surgery or conservative Treatments in Cervical Spondylotic Radiculopathy (CSR) were selected. The primary outcomes were the neck and arm visual analog scale (VAS) and Neck Disability Index (NDI). Secondary outcomes included active range of cervical motion (ROM) and Mental Health. Two reviewers proceeded study selection and quality assessment.

resultsA total of 6 studies, which comprised a total of 464 participants were included in the final meta-analysis. Compared with conservative treatment, surgical treatment was more effective in lowering Neck-VAS (<3 m: MD = -29.44, 95% CI = (-41.62,-17.27), P < .00001; 3-6 M: MD = -20.97, 95% CI = (-26.36,-15.57), P < .00001; 6 M: MD = -13.40, 95% CI = (-19.39, -7.41), P<.0001; 12 M: MD=-15.53, 95% CI=(-28.38, -2.68), P=.02), Arm-VAS(<3 m: MD = -33.52, 95% CI = (-39.89, -27.16), P < .00001; 3-6 M: MD = -20.97, 95% CI = (-26.36, -15.57), P < .00001; 6 M: MD = -17.52, 95% CI=(-23.94, -11.11), P < .0001; 12 M: MD = -21.91, 95% CI=(-27.09, -16.72), P < .00001) and NDI (<3 m: MD = -8.89, 95% CI = (-11.17, -6.61), P < .00001; 6 M: MD = -5.14, 95% CI = (-7.60, -2.69), P < .0001). No significant difference was observed in NDI at 12-month time point (MD = -5.17, 95% CI = (-12.33, 2.00), P = .16), ROM(MD = 2.91, 95% CI = (-4.51, 10.33), P = .77) and Mental Health (MD = .05, 95% CI=(-.24, .33), P = .74).

conclusionThe 6 included studies that had low risk of bias, providing high-quality evidence for the surgical efficacy of CSR. The evidence indicates that surgical treatment is better than conservative treatment in terms of VAS score and NDI score, and superior to conservative treatment in less than one year. There was no evidence of a difference between surgical and conservative care in ROM and mental health. A small sample study with a follow-up of 5 to 8 years showed that surgical treatment was still better than conservative treatment, but the sample size was small and the results should be carefully interpreted.Compared with conservative treatment, surgical treatment had a faster onset of response, especially in pain relief, but did not have a significant advantage in range of motion or NDI. This seems to mean that for patients with severe or even unbearable pain, the benefits of surgery as soon as possible will be significant. Although it is not clear whether the short-term risks of surgery are outweighed by the long-term benefits, rapid pain relief is necessary. Conservative treatment (including medical exercise therapy, mechanical cervical tractions, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, pain management education, and cervical collar) once or twice a week for 3 months is beneficial in the long term and avoids the risks of surgery. In consideration of the good natural history of CSR and the relatively good outcome of conservative treatment (although symptom relief is slow), we think that surgery is not necessary for patients who do not need rapid pain relief.

Indexed as

Cervical Spondylotic RadiculopathyConservative TreatmentsSurgerySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35324370
PMCPMC9609507
OpenAlexW4220815243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.