ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Comparative analysis of risk factors associated with degeneration of adjacent segments: zero-profile anchored spacer vs. anterior cervical plate and cage construct.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomechanical effects of different intervertebral height reconstructions on the intermediate segment in skip-level ACDF for discontinuous cervical spondylosis: a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Influence of cage material, plating and vertebral bone quality on subsidence and long-term outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion-a retrospective analysis.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Is zero-profile fixation safe in consecutive two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with partial uncinate resection? A finite element analysis.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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is an established treatment for cervical degenerative disc disease, but cervical spine surgery may affect sagittal alignment parameters and induce adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). This study aimed to determine the risk factors for developing ASD following anterior cervical plate and cage (ACPC) compared with the use of zero-profile anchored spacer (ROI-C). Methods: A retrospective contrastive study included 105 patients who underwent ACPC or ROI-C between January 2014 and October 2019 at our treatment centre. There were 50 cases in the ROI-C group and 55 patients in the ACPC group. Clinical and radiological results and the incidence of ASD were assessed after surgery. All patients were further divided into the ASD and non-ASD groups for subgroup analysis. Results: At each follow-up time, there was no statistically significant in radiographic parameters between the two groups. The overall ASD rate was higher in the ACPC group than in the ROI-C group (65.5% vs. 44.0%, Conclusion: Equally good therapeutic effects were achieved with both the ROI-C and ACPC. The occurrence of ASD was considerably higher in the ACPC group than in the ROI-C group. The preoperative Cobb angle, preoperative SA, and ΔCobb were the most associated with an increase in the risk of ASD.
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.