Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36434732›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2022

Are clinical outcomes affected by laminoplasty method and K-line in patients with cervical ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament? A multicenter study.

Nan Li, Sai Ma, Fangfang Duan, Yi Wei, Da He, Narihito Nagoshi, Kota Watanabe, Masaya Nakamura, Morio Matsumoto, Hyeongseok Jeon and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 9 institutions in 5 countries.

Nan LiDepartment of Spine Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, The Fourth Medical College of Peking University, 31 Xinjiekou Dongjie, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100035, China.
Sai MaDepartment of Spine Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, The Fourth Medical College of Peking University, 31 Xinjiekou Dongjie, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100035, China.
Fangfang DuanDepartment of Spine Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, The Fourth Medical College of Peking University, 31 Xinjiekou Dongjie, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100035, China.
Yi WeiDepartment of Spine Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, The Fourth Medical College of Peking University, 31 Xinjiekou Dongjie, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100035, China.
Da HeDepartment of Spine Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, The Fourth Medical College of Peking University, 31 Xinjiekou Dongjie, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100035, China. hedamd@vip.163.com.
Narihito NagoshiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Kota WatanabeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Masaya NakamuraDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Morio MatsumotoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Hyeongseok JeonDepartment of Neurosurgery, Spine and Spinal Cord Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
J J LeeDepartment of Neurosurgery, Spine and Spinal Cord Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Keung-Nyun KimDepartment of Neurosurgery, Spine and Spinal Cord Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Yoon HaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Spine and Spinal Cord Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. hayoon@yuhs.ac.
Kenny KwanDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
A K P CheungDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Aaron ClarkDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Keio University · JPPeking University · CNBeijing Jishuitan Hospital · CNYonsei University · KRChinese University of Hong Kong · CNKangbuk Samsung Hospital · KRNeurological Surgery · USPohang University of Science and Technology · KRUniversity of Hong Kong · HK

Funding

Beijing Health Technologies Promotion Program BHTPP202001Beijing Hospitals Authority Youth Program QML20180402
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOpen-door laminoplasty (ODL) and French-door laminoplasty (FDL) are the main laminoplasty techniques used to treat cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (C-OPLL). However, few studies have compared the outcomes of ODL and modified FDL (mFDL) for C-OPLL. We explored the differences in outcomes between ODL and mFDL for C-OPLL and analyzed the technical efficacy of each procedure in patients with K-line (+) or (-) C-OPLL.

methodsFrom January 2010 to December 2015, 202 patients with K-line (+) or (-) C-OPLL were retrospectively recruited from 4 institutions. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, JOA score recovery rate, operative time, blood loss, and complications. Univariate analysis and binary logistic regression models were adjusted for confounding factors.

resultsTwo hundred patients (mFDL, n = 69; ODL, n = 131) with a median follow-up of 42 months (range 36-54 months) were included. The postoperative JOA score significantly improved in both groups (P < 0.05). After adjusting for confounding factors, there was a statistically significant difference in blood loss (≥ 300 mL) between the two groups (P = 0.005), but there was no significant difference in the postoperative JOA score (≥ 14) (P = 0.062), JOA score recovery rate (≥ 0.82) (P = 0.187), or operative time (≥ 90 min) (P = 0.925). C5 palsy tended to occur more often in the mFDL group, although the difference was not significant (P > 0.05). The stratified analysis of the K-line status showed more blood loss in K-line (+) patients who underwent mFDL, but there was no significant difference in the postoperative JOA score, JOA score recovery rate, or operative time between the ODL and mFDL groups. Additionally, there was no significant difference in blood loss, postoperative JOA score, JOA score recovery rate, or operative time among all patients with K-line (+) or (-) C-OPLL in both groups.

conclusionsBoth ODL and mFDL are effective for patients with C-OPLL. However, more blood loss tends to occur during mFDL. This study showed no significant difference in the operative time or incidence of complications between the two techniques. The efficacy of ODL and mFDL was not affected by the K-line status (+ or -) in patients with C-OPLL.

Indexed as

LaminoplastyOssification of Posterior Longitudinal LigamentCervical VertebraeHumansLongitudinal LigamentsOsteogenesisRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeFrench-doorK-lineLaminoplastyOpen-doorOssification of the posterior longitudinal ligament

Identifiers

PMID36434732
PMCPMC9700906
OpenAlexW4310051379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.