ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Differential diagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy considered in patients spine surgeons referred to neurologists: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhen patients suspected of degenerative cervical myelopathy present with atypical neurological findings, the spine surgeons generally referred the patients to neurologists preoperatively to distinguish it from non-compressive neurological diseases. This study aimed to elucidate the diseases that should be differentiated from degenerative cervical myelopathy and the differentiation points.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study, and extracted consecutive patients who were suspected of degenerative cervical myelopathy with spinal cord compression and consulted a spine surgeon but were referred to a neurologist from 2011 to 2021 because of atypical findings. The main reason for consultation with a neurologist and the definitive diagnosis were investigated.
resultsSixty-eight patients were included (60 men and 8 women; median age [interquartile range], 72 [63–76]). The main reasons for consultation with a neurologist were lack of sensory disturbance in 43 patients, lack of upper extremity symptoms and/or atypical gait impairment in 13, and symptoms in the unilateral upper and lower extremities in 3, and others. Definitive diagnoses were degenerative cervical myelopathy in 40 patients, non-compressive neurological diseases in 26, and others in 2. Non-compressive neurological diseases included parkinsonian syndromes in 9 patients, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis in 3, cerebrovascular disease in 3, and others. Regarding paresis of upper extremity in patients with lack of sensory disturbance, bilateral extensive type and no abnormality in upper extremity were related to non-compressive neurological diseases. In patients with lack of upper extremity symptoms and/or atypical gait impairment, 8 of 10 patients with non-spastic gait were diagnosed with non-compressive neurological diseases, and 5 of them with parkinsonian syndromes.
conclusionsNon-compressive neurological disease should be considered in patients with a lack of sensory disturbance who present with bilateral extensive paresis or no neurological abnormality in the upper extremity. Parkinsonian syndromes should be considered as differential diagnosis for patients presenting with non-spastic abnormal gait.
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.