ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024
Comparison of clinical outcomes between sequestered cervical disk herniation and non-sequestered cervical disk herniation after anterior cervical decompression and fusion: a cohort study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2024. 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, 0 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe advantages of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) were well published, while research on postoperative results in different subtypes of cervical disk herniation (CDH) still remains blank. This study aimed to explore the surgical outcome between sequestration and other types in CDH.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study enrolled 108 patients treated with ACDF in our hospital. The participants were divided into two groups according to the existence of a sequestered disk. The Visual analog scale score, the Japanese Orthopedics Association (JOA) score and the Neck disability index score were used to evaluate postoperative outcome.
resultsSignificant improvements were observed in both groups at every viewpoint (P < 0.001). The mean JOA was 15.04 ± 1.26 in the sequestered disk group and 14.45 ± 1.43 in the non-sequestered disk group two months after the operation (P = 0.026 < 0.05). The improvement in JOA at two months after ACDF showed a significant difference: 46.58% ± 39.17% in the sequestered disk group and 33.39% ± 28.82% in the non-sequestered disk group (P = 0.047 < 0.05). Thirty-two patients in the sequestered disk group (64%) and 19 patients in the non-sequestered disk group (32.76%) presented with high signal intensity of the spinal cord on preoperative cervical T2-weighted MRI (P < 0.001).
conclusionsPatients with sequestered cervical disks seemed to have a higher degree of symptom improvement two months after ACDF. CDH with a sequestered disk appears to be more likely to cause high signal intensity changes in the compressed cervical spine on T2-weighted MRI. We prefer early positive surgery in patients with sequestered cervical disks from the clinical point of view.
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.