Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40145067›Full record

ReviewNorth American Spine Society journal2025

Postoperative complications of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.

Roozbeh Tavanaei, Ali Ansari, Amirali Hatami, Mohammad Javad Heidari, Mohammadreza Dehghani, Ahmad Hajiloo, MirHojjat Khorasanizadeh, Konstantinos Margetis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in North American Spine Society journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Construct length rather than interbody spacer material is associated with reoperation after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Interpreting nonsignificant findings: Reassessing the safety of self-locking standalone cages in octogenarian patients undergoing ACDF.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors.

Roozbeh TavanaeiFunctional Neurosurgery Research Center, Shohada Tajrish Comprehensive Neurosurgical Center of Excellence, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Ali AnsariStudent Research Committee, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Amirali HatamiHealth Policy Research Center, Institute of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Mohammad Javad HeidariStudent Research Committee, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Mohammadreza DehghaniStudent Research Committee, Fasa University of Medical Sciences, Fasa, Iran.
Ahmad HajilooStudent Research Committee, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran.
MirHojjat KhorasanizadehDepartment of Neurosurgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, Icahn School of Medicine, New York City, NY, United States.
Konstantinos MargetisDepartment of Neurosurgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, Icahn School of Medicine, New York City, NY, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is one of the most frequently performed spine procedures for different indications in the cervical spine. Various postoperative complications have been reported following the ACDF. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to calculate the incidence rate of different postoperative complications associated with ACDF surgery and also identify underlying risk factors for each complication. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for observational studies published between January 1996 and March 2023 and reporting postoperative complications associated with ACDF. Randomized controlled trials and interventional investigations were not included in this study. Meta-regression was also performed using generalized linear mixed models with a binomial probability distribution on various potential predicting factors. Results: A total of 222 studies reporting the rate of complications associated with ACDF in 50,584 patients were included in the present study. The overall postoperative complication rate was 16%. The most common complications were excessive neck swelling (11.3%), pseudarthrosis (10.0%), dysphagia (9.5%), cage/graft subsidence (9.4%), worsening myelopathy (7.7%), and hoarseness (2.3%). The rate of nonhome discharge, readmission, and mortality were 13.8%, 3.7%, and 0.1% respectively. Based on meta-regression, more levels of fusion and increased age were significantly associated with an increase in the pooled overall postoperative complication rate. Moreover, the rate of some postoperative complications was significantly associated with a number of perioperative characteristics. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study has been the most extensive meta-analysis conducted on the existing literature regarding ACDF-related complications and potential risk factors. However, future high-quality prospective studies or clinical trials are highly required to provide further evidence and also validate the present findings.

Indexed as

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusionCervical spineComplicationFusionMeta-analysisSafetySpinal surgerySpine

Identifiers

PMID40145067
PMCPMC11938155

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.