ArticleNeurospine2022
What Type of Incision for Anterior Cervical Spine Surgery Involving Long Segments Can Bring Better Cosmetic and Functional Outcomes?
Article in Neurospine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether double transverse incisions could provide superior cosmetic and functional outcomes, including rates of dysphagia and dysphonia, compared with longitudinal incisions in patients undergoing anterior cervical spine surgery (ACSS) involving ≥ 3 levels.
methodsA total of 62 consecutive patients who underwent ACSS involving ≥ 3 levels were included in this study. They consist of 33 with longitudinal incisions (L group) and 29 with double transverse incisions (DT group). We recorded functional outcome measures including the Bazaz score for postoperative dysphagia and the Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10) for postoperative dysphonia. The Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) and the patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) were used to evaluate postoperative skin scarring.
resultsCosmetic results, as assessed using the VSS and POSAS, were significantly better in the DT than in the L group at most follow-up time points (p < 0.01 each). Dysphagia rates were significantly lower in the DT group than in the L group during the late postoperative period from 6 months until final 2 years of follow-up (p < 0.01 each). There were no significant different results between the 2 groups in terms of dysphonia.
conclusionA double transverse incision can be a feasible option when performing ACSS involving ≥ 3 levels, providing better cosmesis and lower rates of persistent dysphagia than with a longitudinal incision.
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.