ArticleMedicine2022
Clinical efficacy and learning curve of posterior percutaneous endoscopic cervical laminoforaminotomy for patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy.
Article in Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of clinical outcomes and complications of biportal and uniportal endoscopic decompression for the treatment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical efficacy and learning curve of percutaneous endoscopic cervical discectomy for symptomatic cervical spondylotic radiculopathy.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Perspective: Cervical laminoforaminotomy (CLF) is safer than anterior cervical diskectomy/fusion (ACDF) for lateral cervical disease.Surgical neurology international · 2024Review
- Stroke pathway performance assessment: a retrospective observational study.BMC health services research · 2023Observational
- The effects of modified Guizhi plus Gegen decoction combined with the blade needle therapy on TCM syndromes, cervical curvature and levels of inflammatory factors in patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy.American journal of translational 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and learning curve of posterior percutaneous endoscopic cervical laminoforaminotomy (PPECLF) in patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR). A total of 64 patients with CSR received PPECLF. Clinical outcome scores included the visual analog scale, Japanese Orthopedic Association score, neck disability index, and modified Macnab criteria. Radiological outcomes included the disc height, C2 to C7 Cobb angle, and range of motion. The learning curve was evaluated using cumulative sum analysis. Patients were divided into accumulation phase and mastery phase groups (A and B), and general data and surgical efficacy were compared between the 2 groups. Follow-up ranged from 12 to 24 months. Clinical outcome scores improved significantly at the final follow-up, and there were no differences in radiological outcomes. Surgical efficacy was excellent and good in 82.8% of patients. The operative time showed a decreasing trend with the accumulation of cases. Patients were divided and the 26th case was the cutoff point according to the learning curve. No significant differences were found in the clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. Decompression with PPECLF was safe and effective in the treatment of CSR. With the accumulation of cases, the operative time was gradually shortened, and the clinical efficacy was significant. The PPECLF procedure can be performed efficiently and safely to treat CSR.
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.