ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2025
Clinical Outcomes of N-HA/pa66 and Titanium Mesh in the Treatment of Lower Cervical Spine Fractures and Dislocations During an 8-Year Follow-Up Period.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Eccentric kyphotic distraction reduction technique for treatment of lower cervical dislocation with locked facet joints].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveStudies evaluating the long-term outcomes of the nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide 66 cages (n-HA/PA66) in treating lower cervical spine fractures have not been reported. The objective is to compare the long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of titanium mesh cage (TMC) and-HA/PA66 for anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) in the treatment of lower cervical spine fractures and dislocations.
methodThis retrospective analysis included 223 patients treated at our hospital between January 2010 and January 2016 who had undergone single-level anterior corpectomy for lower cervical spine fractures and dislocations (with a minimum follow-up of 8 years) using either a TMC (n = 130) or an n-HA/PA66 cage (n = 93). The radiographic parameters, including segmental alignment (SA), cage subsidence, plate-to-disc distance, cervical lordosis (CL), intervertebral height, and fusion status, along with clinical metrics such as Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores and visual analog scale (VAS) assessments, were systematically analyzed at preoperative, postoperative, and final follow-up intervals for the patients involved in the study. The Chi-Square (χ
resultThe mean follow-up durations for the TMC group and n-HA/PA66 group were9.81 ± 2.21 and 9.43 ± 0.92 years, respectively. Moreover, final fusion rates were not significantly different between the n-HA/PA66 group and the TMC group (97.8% and 96.9%, respectively). The final cage subsidence was significantly lower in the n-HA/PA66 group (1.56 ± 0.88 mm, with 17.6% subsidence of > 3 mm) than in the TMC group (2.70 ± 2.02 mm, with 36.9% subsidence) (p < 0.01). Furthermore, CL, SA, plate-to-disc distance, JOA scores, and VAS scores were not significantly different between the two groups (all p > 0.05).
conclusionWithin 8 years following single level ACCF surgery, the n-HA/PA66 cage may be better than TMC in anterior cervical construction for treating lower cervical fractures and dislocations.
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.