ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2024
Vertebral Artery Variation and Imposed Risks Associated with Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Procedures - A Case Study with Surgeons' Perspectives.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Transient neuromonitoring changes and delayed vertebrobasilar infarction following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common cervical procedure with more than 137,000 cases in the United States (U.S.) each year. Historically, ACDF has been a relatively safe procedure despite encountering vital anatomical structures that can risk serious complications. One particularly dangerous sequela of ACDF is the risk of lacerating the vertebral artery (VA). While VA injuries are rare (0.5% of cases), it is crucial for surgeons to prevent this potentially deadly complication with thorough knowledge of VA anatomy. The VA is commonly protected within the transverse foreman; however, anomalies can exist with the artery potentially being found more medial or proximal within the surgical site than expected. The purpose of this article is to report an anomaly found in a cadaveric specimen, where the VA courses within 2 mm of an ACDF plate. Case Report: A 66-year-old male with a past medical history of coronary artery disease passed away due to complications of a myocardial infarction. During cadaveric dissection, it was discovered that the donor had undergone a previous 3-level (C4-C7) ACDF procedure for an unknown reason. Under further examination, the left VA was observed to take an anomalous medially tracking course before eventually entering the transverse foramina of C5. Left anterior tubercles were absent at the level of C5 and C6 with prominent osteophytes found on the anterior tubercles/transverse foramina of the contralateral side. Conclusion: There are no studies published on the anatomy of VA variants and their implications on ACDF procedures. ACDF was found to have complication rates in 13.2% of cases. VA variants are observed in up to 20% of the U.S. population and VA injury in ACDF procedures has a rate near 0.5%. With anatomic variations leading to a higher risk of injury, surgeons are required to take further precautionary steps before operating including ordering computed tomography angiography or magnetic resonance angiography films. Understanding the detailed anatomy of the VA and its variants is critical. Using the perspectives of orthopedic spine surgeons, this study supplements the literature on potential VA anomalies encountered in ACDF procedures.
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.