ReviewIntractable & rare diseases research2022
Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion without plate (ACDFWP) versus anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA) for cervical spondylosis: A meta-analysis and literature review.
Review in Intractable & rare diseases research, 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, 2 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This meta-analysis compared the clinical outcomes between two alternative surgeries for patients with cervical spondylosis, namely anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) without plate (ACDFWP) vs. anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA). We searched databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Web of Science (firstly available-2019). A standard meta-analysis was performed with the included studies. A Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used for the evaluation of the study quality of nonrandomized-controlled trials (nRCTs), while a Risk of Bias (RoB) battery was used for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Eight studies involving 640 patients were included. No significant difference was found in the indices of Neck Disability Index (NDI) score, Visual Analog Score (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, operative time, blood loss, Swallowing Quality of Life Score (SWAL-QL), and complications. Cervical alignment was significantly better in the ACDFWP than in ACDA (mean difference (MD) = -0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-1.11, -0.23],
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.