ArticleSpinal cord2026
Effect of methylprednisolone in cervical spinal cord injury stratified by injury severity: analysis in 908 patients.
Article in Spinal cord, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Kaempferide Promotes Neuroprotection and Functional Recovery After Spinal Cord Injury and is Associated with Differential Regulation of ARG1, CA4, CYP1B1, and OAT.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2026Article
- Effects of postoperative electrical stimulation on quadriceps muscular atrophy in patients with incomplete cervical spinal cord injury. A retrospective study.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
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
STUDY
designCohort study.
objectivesAlthough the effectiveness of methylprednisolone sodium succinate (MPSS) in spinal cord injury (SCI) is controversial, it is hypothesized that the effectiveness and safety profile of MPSS may vary in select cervical SCI sub-populations. The objective of this study is to clarify the effect of MPSS and its impact on adverse events in patients with cervical SCI, stratified by baseline neurological status.
settingThree large prospective, multicenter data sets of patients with acute SCI.
methodsPatients with acute cervical SCI were enrolled. The primary outcomes were upper extremity motor scores (UEMS) and lower extremity motor scores (LEMS) at 1 year. Patients were grouped by baseline American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade.
results908 patients meeting inclusion criteria were analyzed. In AIS grade A patients, the use of MPSS resulted in significantly improved LEMS (mean difference [MD], 3.0; 95% CI, 0.3-5.6; p = 0.02), but not UEMS (MD, 0.5; 95% CI, -2.5-3.5; p = 0.74), at 1 year. In contrast, no significant benefit was observed in patients with AIS grades B, C, or D. In AIS grade A patients, the MPSS group had a lower incidence of cardiopulmonary adverse events (42.5 vs. 62.8%; p < 0.001) and gastrointestinal/genitourinary adverse events (13.7 vs. 22.4%; p = 0.04).
conclusionsMPSS was associated with improved lower extremity motor recovery in AIS grade A cervical SCI patients. No significant effect was seen in patients with incomplete injuries. MPSS was not associated with an overall increase in adverse events, suggesting it may be selectively beneficial in severe cervical SCI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41507290What 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.