Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40600728›Full record

ArticleClinical spine surgery2026

Design, Development, Funding, and Implementation of the CSRS Registry: A Prospective Multicenter Clinical Cervical Spine Registry.

Julie M Witham, Rick C Sasso, Praveen V Mummaneni, K Daniel Riew, Zeeshan M Sardar, Wilson Z Ray, James S Harrop, Themistocles Protopsaltis, Samuel K Cho, Ahmad Nassr and 6 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical spine surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

16 authors.

Julie M WithamLahey Hospital & Medical Center, Lahey, Burlington, MA.
Rick C SassoIndiana Spine Group, Indianapolis, Indiana U Cal San Francisco San Francisco, CA.
Praveen V MummaneniDepartment of Neurosurgery University of California San Francisco.
K Daniel RiewDepartment of Neurosurgery Columbia University, Columbia U, New York, NY.
Zeeshan M SardarDepartment of Neurosurgery Columbia University, Columbia U, New York, NY.
Wilson Z RayDepartment of Neurosurgery Washington University, St. Louis, MO.
James S HarropDepartment of Neurosurgery Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA.
Themistocles ProtopsaltisDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery New York University Langone Health, New York, NY.
Samuel K ChoDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery Icahn School of Medicine at Mt Sinai, New York, NY.
Ahmad NassrDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Aditya VedentamDepartment of Neurosurgery Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI.
Addisu MesfinDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery Medstar Health Research Institute, Washington DC.
John M RheeDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery Emory University, Emory, Atlanta, GA.
Brandon D LawrenceDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Steven C LudwigDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery University of Maryland, Baltimore Maryland.
Zoher GhogawalaLahey Hospital & Medical Center, Lahey, Burlington, MA.ORCID 0000-0003-1345-1831

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designA national prospective cervical spine surgery registry was developed to archive radiographic studies, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and surgical implant data to assess long-term safety.

objectiveTo describe the design, development, funding, and implementation of a cervical spine data registry for 1000 patients with myelopathy and radiculopathy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: While surgery for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy is safe and effective, there is significant practice variation among spine surgeons. While randomized clinical trials (RCTs) can provide high-quality comparative effectiveness data, RCTs lack the ability to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of various surgical procedures and implants among heterogenous real-world patient populations. The CSRS Registry was designed to collect patient demographics, outcomes, radiographic imaging, surgical approach, and implant data for the purpose of conducting high-quality research.

methodsPatients with cervical myelopathy or radiculopathy were enrolled in the CSRS National Registry. De-identified patient data, validated PROMs, radiographic data, and implant data were collected from multiple clinical sites across the United States.

resultsOne thousand patients [mean age, 58 y; 456 (46%) women] were enrolled, with 31% follow-up at 1 year. Five hundred ninety-two patients were diagnosed with radiculopathy, 252 with myelopathy, and 156 with radiculopathy and myelopathy. Patients had significant improvements in their PROMs after surgery. At 1 year, the mean NDI score improved from 37.2 to 20.9 ( P <0.001). The mean self-reported P-mJOA score at baseline was 14.2 and improved to 15.2 by 1 year ( P <0.001). Baseline CSDI score was 23.6 and improved with a 1-year decrease to an average score of 13.6 ( P <0.001). There was significant improvement in PROMIS-10 Physical Health score from 41.0 to 45.9 (n=311; P <0.001) at 1-year follow-up.

conclusionsThe CSRS Registry has successfully collected clinical outcomes data that is being leveraged for comparative effectiveness research and evaluations of the long-term safety and effectiveness of spinal implants.

Indexed as

Cervical VertebraeRegistriesAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProspective StudiesRadiculopathySpinal Cord Diseasescervical spineCSRSmyelopathypatient-reported outcome measuresradiculopathyregistry

Identifiers

PMID40600728
PMCPMC13015799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.