ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2024
Clinical application of 3D-printed fusion cage implantation in treating cervical spondylotic myelopathy.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the clinical efficacy of 3D-printed fusion cage implantation in treating cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 52 patients with single-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy who received anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in Affiliated Hospital of Beihua University from July 2019 to July 2022. They were divided into the 3D group and the control group. Afterward, the perioperative indicators were compared between the two groups. Meanwhile, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, Visual analogue scale (VAS) and neck disability index (NDI) were recorded pre-operation and one-year post-operation. Evaluate the fusion rate of two group of intervertebral fusion cages. Results: The JOA score and NDI of the two groups of patients were significantly improved compared to pre-operation(P<0.05), and the JOA score, JOA score improvement rate, and NDI of the 3D group were better than the control group (P<0.05), the VAS scores were significantly improved compared to pre-operation(P<0.05), but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (p >0.05). The intervertebral height, angle, and cervical Cobb angle of the two groups of patients were significantly improved compared to pre-operation (P<0.05), and the improvement of intervertebral height, angle, and cervical Cobb angle in the 3D group was better than the control group(P<0.05). Conclusion: The clinical efficacy of 3D printed intervertebral fusion cage placement in the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy may be reliable, and it would be better than traditional intervertebral fusion cages in maintaining the height, angle, cervical Cobb angle, and fusion rate of the intervertebral space.
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.