ArticleSpine surgery and related research2024
Comparative Analysis of Characteristics of Lower- and Mid-Cervical Spine Injuries in the Elderly.
Article in Spine surgery and related research, 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
48 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Elderly patients have a higher frequency of upper cervical fractures caused by minor trauma; nevertheless, the clinical differences between mid- and lower-cervical (C6-C7) injuries are unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the epidemiology of lower- and mid-cervical injuries in the elderly. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study included 451 patients aged 65 years or older who had mid- or lower-cervical fractures/dislocations. Patients' demographic and treatment data were examined and compared based on mid- and lower-cervical injuries. Results: There were 139 patients (31%) with lower-cervical injuries and 312 (69%) with mid-cervical injuries. High-energy trauma (60% vs. 47%, p=0.025) and dislocation (55% vs. 45%, p=0.054) were significantly experienced more often by elderly patients with lower-cervical injuries than by patients with mid-cervical injuries. Although the incidence of key muscle weakness at the C5 to T1 levels were all significantly lower in patients with lower-cervical injuries than those with mid-cervical injuries, impairments at C5 occurred in 49% of them, and at C6, in 65%. No significant differences were found in the rates of death, pneumonia, or tracheostomy requirements, and no significant differences existed in ambulation or ASIA impairment scale grade for patients after 6 months of treatment. Conclusions: Elderly patients with lower-cervical fractures/dislocations were injured by high-energy trauma significantly more often than patients with mid-cervical injuries. Furthermore, half of the patients with lower-cervical injuries had mid-cervical level neurological deficits with a relatively high rate of respiratory complications.
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.