ArticleBMC surgery2022
Classification of three-level hybrid surgery for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease: a retrospective study of 108 patients.
Article in BMC surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of hybrid surgeries for the treatment of three-level cervical degenerative disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative Outcomes of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Vs Hybrid Surgery in Multilevel Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.International journal of spine surgery · 2026Article
- Is Motion Preservation With Three-Level Hybrid Cervical Surgery Achieved Without Compromising Clinical Outcomes? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Global spine journal · 2026Review
- Cervical Alignment and Range of Motion Change after Anterior 3-Level Hybrid Surgery Compared with Cervical Laminoplasty: A Matched Cohort Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Article
- Biomechanical Effects on the Prostheses and Vertebrae of Three-Level Hybrid Surgery: A Finite Element Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Article
- The CT Classification of Multilevel Cervical Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament to Guide Hybrid Anterior Controllable Antedisplacement and Fusion vs. Posterior Laminoplasty.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Article
- Anterior cervical hybrid constructs reduce superior adjacent segment burden compared to multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2024Article
- Overloaded vertebral body: a unique radiographic phenomenon following multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Cervical sagittal balance after consecutive three-level hybrid surgery versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: radiological results from a single-center experience.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAccording to the different numbers and locations of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), three-level hybrid surgery (HS) has many constructs. The purpose of the present study was to introduce a classification system for three-level HS and compare the two types with each other and with ACDF.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted involving patients with three-level cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD) who underwent ACDF or HS in our hospital between June 2012 and May 2019. According to the different numbers and locations of ACDFs and CDAs, we classified the three-level HS into two types (type I: one-level CDA and two-level ACDF, and type II: two-level CDA and one-level ACDF). The differences of clinical and radiological outcomes were compared with each other and with three-level ACDF.
resultsA total of 108 patients were analyzed. The Neck Disability Index (NDI) of the ACDF group at 3 months postoperatively was significantly higher than that in the type I and type II groups (p < 0.05). The cervical lordosis was significantly lower in the ACDF group than that in the type I and II groups at 3 days, 6, 12 months postoperatively and the final follow-up (p < 0.05). The range of motion (ROM) of the total cervical spine decreased significantly in all three groups at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and at the final follow-up (p < 0.05). The ACDF group was observed with the most severe loss of ROM of the total cervical spine, followed by the type I group. The type II group could preserve the most ROM of the total cervical spine. The ROM of adjacent segments increased most in the ACDF group, followed by the type I group.
conclusionsCompared with ACDF, three-level HS may yield a faster recovery rate and superior radiological outcomes, such as a superiority in maintaining the cervical curvature and ROM of the total cervical spine and a smaller increase in the ROM of adjacent segments. The advantages were most remarkable in the type II group.
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.