ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2023
Congenital Cervical Stenosis: a Review of the Current Literature.
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical implications of distribution-based CT thresholds in congenital cervical stenosis.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2026Article
- Abnormal Cervical Facet Orientation and Congenital Stenosis: Case Reports and Biomechanical Implications-Illustrative Cases.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- A Narrative Review of Bertolotti's Syndrome: Etiology, Classification, Diagnosis, and Treatment.Cureus · 2026Review
- Anatomic parameters for diagnosing congenital cervical stenosis via computed tomography.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2026Article
- Impact of congenital spinal stenosis on the outcome of three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a retrospective study.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewCongenital cervical stenosis (CCS) is a phenomenon in which an individual has a narrow canal due to abnormal anatomy which can present with earlier degenerative symptoms due to a reduced sagittal diameter. The diagnosis of CCS is important to individual treatment and preventative measures. Often, athletes are warned against sport participation that may cause damage to the cervical spine. There may be a predisposition in certain populations, but lack of data limits conclusions. The current review investigates recent literature on the definition, pathoanatomy, clinical presentation, and management of CCS. It specifically interrogates potential populations predisposed to this condition. RECENT
findingsThe current literature reveals a potential predisposition for CCS in the black population when compared to the white population; however, many studies do not report race when discussing CCS patients. The lack of data limits a consensus on specific populations with a congenitally narrow canal. CCS may be more prevalent in specific populations. With knowledge of populations more at risk for this condition, physicians and teams can be alert when evaluating players and young adults. Furthermore, this may provide insight into risk for symptoms with degenerative disease. These findings introduce an avenue for further research into CCS.
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.