ArticleSurgical neurology international2025
Safety and efficacy of cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for 1-2 level radiculopathy.
Article in Surgical neurology international, 2025. 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
Background: Cervical foraminotomy (CF) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) are both used to treat 1-2 level cervical radiculopathy. We evaluated demographic and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to match cohorts and compare the safety/efficacy of performing CF versus ACDF for 1-2 level unilateral radiculopathy. Methods: This was a retrospective review of 64 patients with similar clinical and radiological data that underwent 1-2 level unilateral CF versus ACDF for cervical radiculopathy. Variables studied included operative revision rates, adverse events, surgical costs, postoperative imaging, PROMIS scores, numeric pain scores, incidence of dysphagia, frequency of vocal cord paralysis, and postoperative neurological status. Results: We found no clinical or radiological differences between patients undergoing ACDF versus CF for unilateral 1-2 level cervical radiculopathy. Surgical differences were observed; ACDF patients demonstrated a 6.25% revision rate versus 0% for CF patients, 40% of ACDF patients reported mild dysphagia versus 0% for CF, 3% undergoing ACDF exhibited vocal cord paralysis versus 0% for CF, and ACDF incurred high implant costs (i.e., $1,836.37 and $2,773.44 for one- and two-level ACDFs) versus 0% for CF warranting no implants. Conclusion: Patients undergoing CF versus ACDF for 1-2 level unilateral cervical radiculopathy required 3.70 fewer postoperative X-rays, 40 min less operative time, and 10.95-h shorter lengths of hospital stay (
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.