SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025
Management of cervical fractures in ankylosing spondylitis: a ten-year systemic review of surgical and nonsurgical outcomes.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis on comparing treatment approaches of cervical fractures in ankylosing spondylitis to determine improvement in outcomes.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Clinical characteristics and management of spinal fractures in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Deformity Correction in Ankylosing Spondylitis with Cervical Fracture: A Case Report.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cervical fractures in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are complex and carry significant morbidity and mortality due to the progressive rigidity and brittle bone characteristic of the disease. This meta-analysis highlights the management techniques and outcomes of cervical fractures in patients with ankylosing spondylitis over the past 10 years. A systematic review was conducted using databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science, covering studies published between 2014 and 2024. Outcomes assessed included neurological outcomes, complications, mortality, reoperations, and length of hospital stay. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist was used to evaluate bias. Sixty-six (66) articles with 1972 patients were analyzed. The mean age of patients was 57.02 years, with a male-to-female ratio of 9.8:1, p < 0.001. Most fractures occurred at C6- C7 (36.66%) and C5- C6 (27.74%). Posterior fusion was the most commonly performed surgery (40.0%), followed by combined anterior-posterior fusion (28.3%), and anterior fusion (22.9%). Nonsurgical management was reported in 8.8% with a failure rate of 1.2%. The reoperation rate was highest in the anterior fusion group (11.1%), and lowest in the combined fusion group (1.7%). Good neurological outcomes were observed in 63.4% of cases, while poor outcomes were noted in 33.7%. The overall mortality rate was 2.9%. Cervical fractures in ankylosing spondylitis present significant challenges due to spinal rigidity, altered biomechanics, and high complication risks. Posterior fusion remains the most utilized approach, while combined anterior-posterior fusion demonstrates lower reoperation rates. Conservative management, including external immobilization, is viable for carefully selected stable fractures. Prospective studies with standardized outcomes are essential to optimize treatment strategies and enhance patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39951225What 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.