ArticleGlobal spine journal2023
Long-Term Survivorship of Cervical Spine Procedures; A Survivorship Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression.
Article in Global spine journal, 2023. 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.
- Retrospective cohort study of recovery trajectories following anterior versus posterior fusion surgery for cervical degenerative pathology.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- What are the Real Achievements in Spine Surgery?Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Treatment decision-making factors among patients with cervical myelopathy: a discrete-choice experiment.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2024Article
- Treatment of the two-level degenerative cervical disk diseases based on algorithmic anterior approach: a multicenter prospective study.Neurosurgical review · 2023Article
- Nonoperative Care Versus Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: An Application of a Health Economic Technique to Simulate Head-to-Head Comparisons.JB & JS open accessArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designSystematic Review.
objectivesTo conduct a meta-analysis on the survivorship of commonly performed cervical spine procedures to develop survival function curves for (i) second surgery at any cervical level, and (ii) adjacent level surgery.
methodsA systematic review of was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Articles with cohorts of greater than 20 patients followed for a minimum of 36 months and with available survival data were included. Procedures included were anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), cervical disc arthroplasty (ADR), laminoplasty (LAMP), and posterior laminectomy and fusion (PDIF). Reconstructed individual patient data were pooled across studies using parametric Bayesian survival meta-regression.
resultsOf 1829 initial titles, 16 citations were included for analysis. 73 811 patients were included in the second surgery analysis and 2858 patients in the adjacent level surgery analysis. We fit a Log normal accelerated failure time model to the second surgery data and a Gompertz proportional hazards model to the adjacent level surgery data. Relative to ACDF, the risk of second surgery was higher with ADR and PDIF with acceleration factors 1.73 (95% CrI: 1.04, 2.80) and 1.35 (95% CrI: 1.25, 1.46) respectively. Relative to ACDF, the risk of second surgery was lower with LAMP with deceleration factor .06 (95% CrI: .05, .07). ADR decreased the risk of adjacent level surgery with hazard ratio .43 (95% CrI: .33, .55).
conclusionsIn cases of clinical equipoise between fusion procedures, our analysis suggests superior survivorship with anterior procedures. For all procedures, laminoplasty demonstrated superior survivorship.
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.