ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2026
Spinous Process Osteotomy for Exposure of the Posterior Cervical Spine: An Innovative Technique to Preserve Midline Structures.
Article in International journal of spine 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgery on the posterior cervical spine involves bilateral exposure and removal of midline structures, which may lead to chronic neck pain, dropped head syndrome, and an ugly scar. We present our experience of an innovative technique of posterior cervical approach using spinous process osteotomy with preservation of midline structures.
methodsA total of 25 consecutive myelopathic patients underwent 1- to 4-level posterior cervical decompression with or without fusion and were followed up prospectively for 6 to 24 months. Left-sided exposure was done through a midline skin incision, and bilateral exposure of the spine was achieved through spinous process osteotomy. Laminectomy with or without instrumented fusion was performed, and the wound was closed over a drain. All patients were mobilized without orthoses.
resultsThere were 15 men and 10 women with a mean age of 68 years; mean blood loss was 150 mL; mean operating time was 150 minutes; mean follow-up was 12 months. The mean improvement in Neck Disability Index at final follow-up was 26% with a 2-point improvement in visual analog scale. Japanese Orthopaedic Association score improved from a mean of 12 to 16, and using Odom's criteria, the final outcome was good in 19 patients and excellent in 6. Nurick grade improved from 3 to 1, and all patients reported significant relief of myelopathic symptoms without chronic neck pain. Two patients had postoperative superficial wound infections, and 1 patient underwent reoperation for hematoma.
conclusionIn this cohort study, the spinous process osteotomy technique was easy to perform, was safe with a low complication rate, and had positive outcomes. However, more studies are required to compare its efficacy with other techniques.
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.