Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42016457›Full record

ArticleBrain & spine2026

Is outcome of anterior cervical discectomy for cervical radiculopathy influenced by securing the intervertebral cage?

Azra Gül, Yi Lu, Hasan A Zaidi, Jessica Grace, Daniela Limbania, Timothy R Smith, Caroline Mw Goedmakers, Carmen Vleggeert-Lankamp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain & spine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Azra GülDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Yi LuComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Hasan A ZaidiComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Jessica GraceComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Daniela LimbaniaComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Timothy R SmithComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Caroline Mw GoedmakersDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Carmen Vleggeert-LankampDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) for cervical radiculopathy is commonly performed with a cage and plate in the United States, whereas in Europe, standalone cages are frequently used instead. Knowledge about difference in clinical outcome is scarce. Research question: Are there differences in clinical outcomes in patients undergoing ACDF using a cage with an anterior plate, a cage with integrated screws, or a standalone cage? Methods: 570 patients with cervical radiculopathy were included: 414 received a cage with plate (US), 54 received cages with integrated screws (US) and 102 received a standalone cage (86% Netherlands). The clinical outcomes Visual Analogue Scale arm and neck pain, and pain interference were assessed at baseline, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after inclusion, and analysed using linear mixed-effects models. Furthermore, the Minimal Clinical Important Difference was assessed and to explore individual patient-level outcome, cut-off values for clinical success were utilized. Results: Baseline clinical parameters were comparable in the three groups. Linear mixed-effects models revealed no statistically significant differences in clinical outcome over time. However, dichotomized clinical success rates for neck pain were significantly higher in the standalone group (62.9% at 6 months, 79.3% at 12 months, 85.7% at 24 months), compared to the cage with plate group (59.5%, 61.2%, 58.9%) and the integrated screws group, which showed more variability (58.3%, 26.7%, 44.4%). Discussion and conclusion: No substantial differences were observed at the group mean-level, however, the standalone cage group demonstrated higher individual-level success-rates, particularly regarding neck pain.

Indexed as

ACDFCervical radiculopathyStandalone cageVAS

Identifiers

PMID42016457
PMCPMC13094434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.