ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine
Retrospective evaluation of cervical fusion with DTRAX (R) cervical cage.
Article in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The use of cervical interfacet devices and related clinical outcomes.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 · 2025Article
- Safety and efficacy of minimally invasive posterior cervical fusion: a single center, single surgeon retrospective review.Journal of surgical case reports · 2024Article
- Intrafacet Spacer Placement as a Mobility-Sparing Bailout Option in Atlantoaxial Fusion Construct Salvage.Ochsner journal · 2024Article
- Use of Epic Electronic Health Record System for Health Care Research: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Perioperative and safety outcomes following tissue-sparing posterior cervical fusion to revise a pseudarthrosis: A multicenter retrospective review of 150 cases.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
Background: Cervical radiculopathy is a relatively common problem that often affects individuals in their 5 Methods: This retrospective analysis was performed by chart review of patients who underwent posterior cervical fusion and received the DTRAX spinal implant at University of California, Los Angeles within the last 8 years. Patient charts were located using the surgical cases report function of Epic electronic medical record, and patients were included in the study if they received a DTRAX implant during the stated time period. Data were compiled and analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Results: A total of 14 patient charts were reviewed. Of the 14, there were no immediate postoperative complications. One international patient was subsequently lost to follow-up, and of the remaining 13, mean follow-up duration was 273 days, with a range of 15-660 days. All but one reported improvement of symptoms postoperatively, there were no device failures, and no reoperations were required. There were similar outcomes in patients who received single versus multilevel operations. Conclusion: The findings of this retrospective study of 14 patients who received the DTRAX facet system over the last 8 years support the conclusions of previous studies that DTRAX is safe and effective. In addition, this is the first study to look for differences in outcomes between single and multi-level DTRAX operations, of which there were none. Further investigation with larger cohorts should be conducted as DTRAX becomes more widely adopted in order to verify its safety and efficacy in various clinical scenarios.
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.