ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Treatment and prognosis of spinal cord reperfusion injury after cervical spinal canal stenosis surgery: a case report.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Spinal cord reperfusion injury of the cervical spine is a rare but severe postoperative complication, typically occurring after the decompression of chronically compressed spinal cord tissue. The report aims to present a case of early postoperative spinal cord reperfusion injury that was successfully managed, and to discuss its underlying pathogenesis, treatment strategies, and clinical outcomes. Case report: A 63-year-old middle-aged male was admitted with a 3-month history of neck and shoulder pain accompanied by numbness and pain in both upper limbs. MRI and clinical evaluations revealed cervical spinal canal stenosis with radiculopathy. The patient underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), with no intraoperative complications noted. 2 h after the operation, when the patient regained consciousness, it was found that the muscle strength of both lower limbs was grade 1, that of both upper limbs was grade 2, and the skin sensation of the lower limbs was gradually fades. However, four hours after surgery, upon regaining consciousness, the patient developed complete quadriplegia and loss of skin sensation, with progressive worsening. An emergency MRI ruled out intracranial pathology but revealed spinal cord edema at the surgical site. Based on the clinical course and imaging findings, spinal cord reperfusion injury was suspected. The patient was immediately transferred through the emergency "green channel" for urgent posterior cervical laminoplasty to achieve expanded decompression, accompanied by intraoperative and postoperative high-dose corticosteroid therapy. One day after the second surgery, the patient's muscle strength improved to Grade 3. Following two months of postoperative treatment and rehabilitation, the patient made a full recovery and was discharged. Follow-up MRI demonstrated substantial resolution of spinal cord edema and restoration of spinal cord morphology. This case illustrates that early recognition of spinal cord reperfusion injury and timely, appropriate intervention can significantly improve neurological outcomes, providing valuable insight for the management of similar cases. Conclusion: Spinal cord reperfusion injury after cervical spine surgery is rare, but once it occurs, it requires a high level of clinical vigilance. Identifying the underlying cause, making a rapid diagnosis, and initiating timely surgical intervention combined with corticosteroid pulse therapy are essential to preventing irreversible neurological damage.
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.