ArticleCureus2025
Clinical Outcome and Our Experience of 33 Consecutive Cases Treated With Cervical Microendoscopic Laminoplasty in a Single Clinic.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCervical microendoscopic laminoplasty (CMEL) is a less invasive operation for cervical myelopathy. This method is gradually spreading; however, the literature seems to have few reports concerning clinical outcomes. This study aims to report the effectiveness of CMEL performed in a private clinic.
methodsPatients who underwent CMEL from April 2023 to July 2024 in our private clinic were retrospectively researched. The patient's background and the following operative data were collected, such as the number of vertebral levels treated with CMEL, additional foraminotomy, operative time, and intraoperative bleeding. Postoperative data were also collected, including admission days, complications, surgical outcomes, radiological changes, and follow-up periods. In this study, those patients with severe cardiovascular, pulmonary, and renal problems and/or significant motor weakness requiring postoperative rehabilitation were excluded. Results: Consecutive 33 patients (30 spondylotic myelopathy and three ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament) with a median age of 60 years were enrolled. CMEL was performed for a single level in 13 cases, two in 15, and three in five, respectively. Foraminotomy was concurrently performed in eight cases. The mean operative time and intraoperative bleeding were 105 minutes and 21 g, respectively. All the patients were discharged from the hospital the following day after surgery on their own without severe neck pain. Postoperative extradural hematoma occurred only in a single case, which was managed with an additional operation. The median postoperative follow-up period (minimum-maximum) was 9.5 (two to 18) months. The outcome evaluated with the McNab score was excellent (six cases), good (22 cases), fair (four cases), and poor (one case). The median C2-7 angle improved from 6.2° preoperatively to 8.1° postoperatively with no significant difference.
conclusionCMEL can be performed in a private clinic for patients without perioperative high risks.
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.