ArticleAsian spine journal2025
Effectiveness of various anterior noncontiguous cervical spine surgeries for treatment of noncontiguous cervical degenerative disk disease: a network meta-analysis.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the effectiveness of noncontiguous anterior cervical surgical techniques for noncontiguous cervical degenerative disk disease (CDDD) in terms of clinical outcomes. There is a lack of consensus regarding optimal surgical management of noncontiguous CDDD. This NMA compared the clinical effectiveness of various anterior cervical surgical techniques to guide decision-making and improve patient outcomes. PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through October 10, 2024, for studies comparing noncontiguous anterior surgeries for noncontiguous CDDD. Mean differences (MD) and relative risks (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects NMA models. Of the 504 articles retrieved, five cohort studies and one randomized trial were included. Patients (n=312; mean age, 51.8 years) underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with plate fixation (n=76), ACDF with zero-profile spacer (n=95), cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA; n=45), fusion-mobility hybrid cervical surgery (HCS; n=64), or fusion-fusion HCS (n=32). No significant differences or clear ranking superiority were observed for Japanese Orthopedic Association or Neck Disability Index scores. Compared to noncontiguous ACDF with plate fixation, noncontiguous ACDF with spacer and noncontiguous CDA had a significantly lower risk of postoperative complications. Additionally, noncontiguous ACDF with spacer had a significantly lower risk of dysphagia, and all other comparisons had a lower risk of intermediate adjacent segment disease (ASD). There were no cases of pseudoarthrosis, and one case of reoperation. Certainty of evidence was "very low." This NMA provides very low certainty evidence of similar functional outcomes across surgical techniques for noncontiguous CDDD, but the risk of complications, intermediate segment ASD, and dysphagia may vary depending on technique. These findings highlight the need for higher-quality research to guide the selection of surgical technique for noncontiguous CDDD.
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.