Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39574781›Full record

ArticleJB & JS open access

Nonoperative Care Versus Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: An Application of a Health Economic Technique to Simulate Head-to-Head Comparisons.

Markian Pahuta, Mohamed Sarraj, Jason Busse, Daipayan Guha, Mohit Bhandari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Markian PahutaDivision of Orthopedic Surgery, Hamilton General Hospital, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4808-5459
Mohamed SarrajDivision of Orthopedic Surgery, Hamilton General Hospital, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3879-0445
Jason BusseDepartments of Anesthesia and Health Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0178-8712
Daipayan GuhaDivision of Neurosurgery, Hamilton General Hospital, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2052-4819
Mohit BhandariDivision of Orthopedic Surgery, Hamilton General Hospital, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3556-9179

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) occurs when spondylotic changes compress the spinal cord and cause neurologic dysfunction. Because of a lack of comparative data on nonoperative care versus surgery for DCM, it has been difficult to support patients through the shared decision-making process regarding treatment options. Our objective was to synthesize the best available data in a manner that helps clinicians and patients to weigh the differences between nonoperative care and surgery at different ages and disease severity. The 2 patient-centered questions we sought to answer were (1) "am I more likely to experience worsening myelopathy with nonoperative care, or need more surgery if I have my myelopathy treated operatively?" and (2) "how much better will my quality of life be with nonoperative care versus surgery?" Methods: We used a health economic technique, microsimulation, to model head-to-head comparisons of nonoperative care versus surgery for DCM. We incorporated the best available data, modeled patients over a lifetime horizon, used direct comparators, and incorporated uncertainty in both natural history and treatment effect. Results: Patients with mild DCM at baseline who were ≥75 years of age were less likely to neurologically decline under nonoperative care than to undergo a second surgery if the index surgery was an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), cervical disc arthroplasty (ADR), or posterior cervical decompression and instrumented fusion (PDIF). Using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), our results suggest that surgery for DCM may be superior to nonoperative care. However, for all patients except those with severe DCM who are of middle age or younger (depending on the procedure, ≤50 to ≤60 years of age), the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval for the estimated difference in QALYs was <0. Conclusions: In most patient groups, neurologic progression with nonoperative management is more likely than the need for additional cervical surgery following operative management, with the exception of patients 75 to 80 years of age and older with mild DCM. Furthermore, on average, surgery for DCM tends to improve quality of life. However, patients with DCM who are older than middle age should be aware that the estimates of the quality-of-life benefit are highly uncertain, with a lower bound of <0. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Identifiers

PMID39574781
PMCPMC11575992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.