ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2023
Assessing
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- From static X-rays to dynamic 3D tracking: A scoping review of cervical spine Imaging-Based motion assessment.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Cross-validation of two independent methods to analyze the sequence of segmental contributions in the cervical spine in extension cineradiographic recordings.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The quality of flexion-extension motion after cervical disc arthroplasty has been a subject of interest due to the number of available devices with different designs and kinematics. Previous studies of motion quality have been limited to measuring the range of motion using two radiographs taken at the extremes of flexion and extension. This is the first study evaluating the Methods: Eligible participants had previously undergone a single-level cervical disc arthroplasty surgery for degenerative cervical spine disease performed by the senior author. Study participants underwent dynamic lateral fluoroscopic imaging to capture the C2-C7 motion between maximal flexion and extension. The amount of motion contribution by individual segments to the C2-C7 motion (termed segmental motion fraction) and its variation throughout the arc of flexion-extension were compared between the index and adjacent segments. The shift of centre of rotation during the arc of motion was also assessed. Results: Ten subjects with a mean age of 43.8 years old were recruited, with an average follow-up of 16.2 months at the time of fluoroscopy. The C2-C7 cervical spine had an average flexion-extension range of 66.7 degrees. The contribution of the index segment averaged over the flexion-extension arc of motion was 18.9% (peak contribution 24.4%) for the C5-C6 group; and 15.5% (peak contribution 25.5%) for the C6-C7 group. The mean cranial-caudal location of the centre of rotation progressively shifted in the cranial direction from C2-C3 to C6-C7 motion segment. Conclusions: Our results demonstrated physiologic quality of motion at the index segment and harmony among its neighbouring segments following cervical disc arthroplasty, without gearshift-like intermittent locking of the prosthesis during the arc of flexion-extension motion. This pilot study provides a basis for the design of future long-term studies with larger sample size to compare the quality of motion between different cervical disc prostheses using the concept of segmental motion fraction as a motion-quality metric.
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.