ReviewCureus2024
Optimal Timing in Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of Ultra-Early Surgical Intervention Within Five Hours.
Review in Cureus, 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal timing of surgery for cervical spinal cord injuries (SCI) and its impact on neurological recovery continue to be subjects of debate. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to consolidate and assess the existing evidence regarding the efficacy of ultra-early decompression surgery in improving clinical outcomes after cervical SCI. A search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL databases from inception until September 18, 2023, focusing on human studies. The groups were categorized into ultra-early decompression (decompression surgery ≤ 5 hours post-injury) and a control group (decompression surgery between 5-24 hours post-injury). A random effects meta-analysis was performed on all studies using R Studio. Outcomes were reported as effect size (OR, treatment effect, and 95% CI. Of the 140 patients, 63 (45%) underwent decompression ≤ 5 hours, while 77 (55%) underwent decompression > 5 hours post-injury. Analysis using the OR model showed no statistically significant difference in the odds of neurological improvement between the ultra-early group and the early group (OR = 1.33, 95% CI: 0.22-8.18, p = 0.761). This study did not observe significant neurological improvement among cervical SCI patients who underwent decompression within five hours. Due to the scarcity of literature on the ultra-early decompression of cervical SCI, this study underscores the necessity for additional investigation into the potential benefits of earlier interventions for cervical SCI to enhance patient outcomes.
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.