ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Preservation of short-term cervical posterior muscle volume and cervical alignment: a comparison between three types of modified muscle-sparing laminoplasty and conventional open-door laminoplasty for multilevel degenerative cervical myelopathy.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundsSeveral modified muscle-sparing laminoplasty (LP) techniques have been developed to prevent axial symptoms in the treatment of multilevel degenerative cervical myelopathy (MDCM). However, the postoperative changes in posterior muscle volume (PMV) and cervical alignment following these procedures remain controversial. This study aimed to compare the short-term postoperative changes in PMV and cervical alignment between conventional LP and three types of muscle-sparing LPs: unilateral muscle-preservation laminoplasty (UL), double-door laminoplasty (DL), and intermuscular "raising roof" laminoplasty (RL).
methodsConsecutive MDCM patients who underwent LP, DL, UL, or RL between February 2022 and May 2022 at a same ward were enrolled. Baseline data and surgical characteristics were collected. Preoperative and postoperative PMV were semiautomatically segmented and evaluated, and cervical alignment was measured. The PMV loss ratio was calculated as the change in PMV divided by the preoperative PMV.
resultsA total of 79 MDCM patients were included in this study (LP: 20, DL: 20, UL:23, RL:16). No significant differences were observed in the preoperative demographic data, surgical characteristics and radiological variables. The preoperative C2-7 cobb angles of four groups were 11.59 ± 8.80, 9.54 ± 11.18, 11.08 ± 11.32 and 10.75 ± 10.90, respectively(p = 0.962). The preoperative PMV were 2.726 ± 0.79, 2.607 ± 0.752, 2.808 ± 0.724, 2.686 ± 0.674*10
conclusionsThe DL group has significant lower postoperative CL-E loss than LP. After adjustment, the RL procedure demonstrated better efficacy in PMV preservation compared to conventional LP. The loss of cervical lordosis at neutral and extension positions was associated with the PMV loss ratio.
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.