SynthesisThe journal of spinal cord medicine2025
Impact of ultra-early, early and delayed decompression on neurological and clinical outcomes in spinal cord injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The journal of spinal cord medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Optimal timing of surgical decompression for acute cervical spinal cord injury: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- Early Surgical Decompression and Pulmonary Embolism Risk in Traumatic Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: A Propensity Score-Matched National Analysis.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- A scoping review on the essential role of global neurotrauma in achieving the sustainable development goals.Discover public health · 2026Review
- Surgical Timing After Spinal Cord Injury: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence and Perspectives.Korean journal of neurotrauma · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study investigates the impact of various surgical timing strategies on neurological and clinical outcomes in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) through a meta-analysis. Specifically, it compares the effectiveness of early, ultra-early, and delayed decompression surgeries in optimizing patient recovery.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, to identify studies on surgical timing for SCI. Studies evaluating ultra-early surgery (≤8 h or ≤12 h), early surgery (≤24 h), and delayed surgery (>24 h) were included. A total of 16 studies were included, involving outcome indicators such as American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) score, length of stay, complications, and mortality.
resultsCompared with delayed surgery, early surgery (≤24 h) significantly shortened the length of stay (MD = -2.31 days, 95% CI: -4.18, -0.43;
conclusionThe timing of surgical intervention significantly influences recovery in SCI patients. Early and ultra-early surgery can shorten hospital stay, reduce the risk of complications, and improve neurological outcomes in some cases.
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.