Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36896262›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in surgery2023

Comparison of discover cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc diseases: A meta-analysis of prospective, randomized controlled trials.

Ziqi Wang, Gan Luo, Hongwei Yu, Hui Zhao, Tianhao Li, Houzhi Yang, Tianwei Sun

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ziqi WangSchool of Medicine, Nankai University, Tianjin, China.
Gan LuoGraduate School of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Hongwei YuSchool of Medicine, Nankai University, Tianjin, China.
Hui ZhaoSchool of Medicine, Nankai University, Tianjin, China.
Tianhao LiGraduate School of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Houzhi YangGraduate School of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Tianwei SunDepartment of Spine Surgery, Tianjin Union Medical Center, Tianjin, China.
Nankai University · CNTianjin Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety between Discover cervical disc arthroplasty (DCDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in Cervical degenerative disc diseases. Methods: Two researchers independently conducted a search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails (CENTRAL) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) following the Cochrane methodology guidelines. A fixed-effects or random-effects model was applied based on different heterogeneity. Review Manager (Version 5.4.1) software was used to perform data analysis. Results: A total of 8 RCT studies were included in this meta-analysis. The results indicate that the DCDA group had a higher incidence of reoperation ( Conclusion: DCDA and ACDF have similar results in terms of NDI scores, VAS scores, EQ-5D scores, and dysphagia. In addition, DCDA can reduce the risk of ASD but increases the risk of reoperation.

Indexed as

anterior cervical discectomy and fusiondegenerative disc diseasesdiscover cervical disc arthroplastymeta-analysisrandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID36896262
PMCPMC9989026
OpenAlexW4321459197

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.