ReviewBrain & spine2024
The efficacy of anchored stand-alone spacers in comparison to conventional cage and plate in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials for clinical and radiological outcomes.
Review in Brain & spine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of ACDF with stand-alone PEEK cage versus zero-p implant for the treatment of cervical degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Polyetheretherketone Cage or Anterior Cervical Plate: A Comparative Evaluation of Short-term Outcomes.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
- Is screw position a greater contributor to adjacent segment disease than plate-to-disc distance following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion?BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Influence of subaxial cervical spine surgery on the sagittal alignment of the cervical and global spine. A prospective observational study.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Early outcomes of stand-alone cage anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A comparative analysis with cage-plate fixation in a developing spine practice.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is commonly performed with cage and plate constructs to stabilise diseased or injured cervical segments. Despite it being a commonly performed procedure, there are notable rates of associated morbidity reported in the literature. Stand-alone spacers represent a novel form of instrumentation to conventional cage and plate constructs. Research question: Do stand-alone spacers have improved operative characteristics and postoperative outcomes in ACDF cohorts when compared to cage and plate constructs? Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted of PubMed/Medline, Embase and Google Scholar databases per the Results: 10 RCTs were identified and included with 779 patients total. Mean age of the entire cohort was 50.1 years. 62% (483/779) of the cohort were male. 384 patients underwent ACDF with stand-alone cage, while 395 had ACDF with conventional cage and plate. Stand-alone spacers significantly outperformed conventional instrumentation in terms of estimated blood loss (p < 0.01), total postoperative complications (p < 0.01), dysphagia rates (p = 0.04) and adjacent segment disease (p = 0.04). Non-inferiority was evident in both patient reported outcome measures and radiological outcomes. Conclusion: This meta-analysis highlights the efficacy of stand-alone spacers for the management of primarily cervical spondylitic disease for both single-level and multi-level pathology, and thus presents an attractive alternative to conventional instrumentation for patients undergoing ACDF surgery.
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.