ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
A comparative study on clinical outcomes and safety of accurate anterior cervical ossified posterior longitudinal ligament en bloc resection versus piecemeal resection in patients with ossification of the cervical posterior longitudinal ligament: a propensity score-matching analysis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comparative study on surgical management of long-course symptomatic cervical OPLL between anterior en bloc resection and posterior laminectomy with instrumented fusion.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Anterior cervical V-Slot decompression and fusion for long-segment cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a follow-up study.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
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
Abstract
objectiveThe anterior approach for cervical ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) excision can improve long-term neurofunctional recovery by providing direct spinal cord decompression. The objective of the present study was to compare the clinical outcomes and complications between accurate anterior cervical ossified posterior longitudinal ligament en bloc resection (ACOE) versus piecemeal resection (ACOP) using propensity score-matching analysis.
methodsIncluded in this study were 189 OPLL patients (65 female) who underwent anterior cervical surgery, with a mean age of 54.85 years. Of them, 105 patients (39 female) with a mean age of 55.69 years underwent ACOE, and the remaining 84 patients (26 female) with a mean age of 53.80 underwent ACOP. Of the 189 patients, 70 patients (37%) had a canal occupying ratio (COR) ≥ 50%, and therefore the patient data were stratified by COR with 50%. The clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups during a at least 27-month follow-up period.
resultsThe mean final follow-up JOA score in ACOE group was higher than that in ACOP group. The JOA recovery rate of patients with COR ≥ 50% was higher in ACOE group. The mean operative time and intraoperative blood loss were both lower in ACOE group. However, postoperative complications were not significantly different between the two groups.
conclusionThis study demonstrated that the ACOE technique gained higher JOA recovery rates and better neurological recovery than ACOP for OPLL patients with COR ≥ 50%. In addition, ACOE offered a shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss as compared with ACOP. Therefore, the postoperative complications were not more common between two groups.
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.