ArticleBiomedical reports2024
Percutaneous plasma disc decompression through a lower surgical approach for the treatment of cervicogenic headache in patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Biomedical reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research Progress on Low-Temperature Plasma Nucleoplasty and Targeted Radiofrequency for Cervical Spondylotic Radiculopathy: A Retrospective Review.Pain and therapy · 2026Review
- Minimally Invasive Interventions for Cervicogenic Headache: A Systematic Review of Targeted Anatomical Approaches and Clinical Outcomes.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- Effect of intervertebral foramen area and width on postoperative pain relief in patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Efficacy and safety of manufactured Chinese herbal formula for cervical radiculopathy: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 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
Cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR) is the most common type of cervical spondylosis, frequently accompanied by cervicogenic headache (CEH). Percutaneous plasma disc decompression (PPDD) and pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) are minimally invasive techniques targeting cervical intervertebral discs or cervical nerves, and have been proven to be effective methods for treatment of CSR and CEH. The present study aimed to evaluate clinical efficacy and practicality of percutaneous plasma disc decompression (PPDD) via a lower surgical approach for the treatment of cervicogenic headache (CEH) and upper extremity radicular pain by analyzing clinical outcomes of patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR) undergoing PPDD and pulsed radiofrequency (PRF). Clinical data of patients with CSR who received PPDD (n=79) or PRF (n=92) at Shanghai Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital (Shanghai, China) and Jiashan County People's Hospital (Jiaxing, China) from January 2022 to December 2022 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The surgical site and procedure, bleeding volume, preoperative analgesic use and upper extremity symptoms, history of nerve block treatment and duration of disease were recorded, as well as relevant postoperative complications (infection, hematoma, nerve injury). The therapeutic effects [NRS (numeric rating scale) and NDI (neck disability index) score, and CEH remission rate at 1, 3 and 6 months after treatment] of both surgical methods were investigated using the telephone follow-up. CEH remission rates at 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery in the PPDD group were significantly higher than in the PRF group (78.8 vs. 43.5, P=0.016; 84.8 vs. 34.8, P=0.003 and 75.8 vs. 26.1%, P=0.005, respectively). The PPDD group showed higher NRS scores than the PRF group at 1 month after surgery (3 vs. 2, P<0.0001) and lower NRS scores than the PRF group at 6 months after surgery (2 vs. 3, P<0.0001). NDI scores in the PPDD group were significantly lower than those in the PRF group at 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery (15.49 vs. 20.05, P=0.002; 16.06 vs. 20.10, P=0.003 and 9.90 vs. 13.80, P=0.001, respectively). There was no significant difference in postoperative complication rate between the two groups (P>0.999). PPDD could significantly relieve CEH symptoms and upper extremity radicular pain in patients with CSR treated via a lower surgical approach and PPDD was more effective than PRF for long-term CEH remission and pain alleviation.
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.