ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2024
Clinical and radiographic outcomes after index anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with interbody spacer with integrated anchor fixation: a single-surgeon case study.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The use of plate-cage systems in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been shown to produce fusion and good clinical outcomes though it has been associated with complications such as dysphagia at higher rates than stand-alone implant devices. This study aimed to assess the incidence of dysphagia and radiographic outcomes in adult patients who have undergone ACDF with interbody spacer with integrated anchor fixation (ISa). Methods: Patients who underwent index ACDF with a commercially available ISa by a fellowship-trained spine surgeon between January 2018 and December 2021 were retrospectively included. Patients with less than 90-days follow-up or those who underwent ACDF for trauma, infection, or tumor were excluded. Demographic data, perioperative data, radiographic data and perioperative complications were collected. Results: Forty-five patients were included for study. Eight patients (17.8%) experienced dysphagia immediately following surgery, which resolved by 6 months post-op, barring 1 patient. Preoperative global and segmental lordosis were 10.4°±9.3° and 6.9°±7.3° respectively. At three months postoperatively, global and segmental lordosis were 8.9°±7.9° (P=0.50) and 7.0°±5.9° (P=0.56) respectively. Fusion rate at six months was 78.3% (18/23) and 100% (18/18) at 1 year. Conclusions: ACDF with ISa is a viable alternative to traditional plate-cage systems. ISa shows lower rates of immediate, 3-month and 6-month dysphagia than traditional plate-cage systems described in the literature. More controlled studies on larger populations will help formulate a concrete conclusion on the advantages of ISa spacers.
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.