ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine
The impact of cage position, radiographic parameters, and hounsfield units on subsidence rate after one to three level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.
Article in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study Design: The study design was a retrospective cohort. Objective: The objective of the study was to validate the relationship between Hounsfield units (HU) and subsidence, including multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Cage/graft subsidence commonly occurs after ACDF. Prior work on 1-level ACDF found increased subsidence rates in patients with lower HUs. Materials and Methods: Adults who underwent 1-3 level ACDF at a tertiary center and had preoperative computed tomography scans were included (2018-2022). HUs were assessed ~5 mm caudal to the superior endplate. Six-month postoperative radiographs were evaluated for cage/graft positioning, screw loosening, and subsidence. Receiver operating characteristic curves and area under the curve (AUC) assessed the predictive value of segmental/minimum/maximum HU for screw loosening and/or subsidence. Results: Forty-two patients (82 levels) were included - demographics were similar among patients with versus without subsidence at any level. Average HU, segmental HU, segmental HU above and below 343.7 HU, minimum HU, and maximum HU were similar between patients with versus without subsidence at any level. Among the HU measurements, the maximum AUC was 0.554 (95% confidence interval 0.421-0.687) for screw loosening as predicted by minimum HU with a cutoff of 313 HU. Subsidence was more associated with middle positioning compared to anterior (28.0% vs. 10.5%, Conclusions: Contrary to prior literature, this study found no association and minimal predictive ability of segmental, minimum, or maximum HU values and subsidence or screw loosening after 1-3 level ACDF. Middle positioning was associated with cage/graft subsidence. This suggests that central positioning of the cage/graft is a risk factor for subsidence, potentially due to softer cancellous bone centrally.
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.