ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Biomechanical effects of different intervertebral height reconstructions on the intermediate segment in skip-level ACDF for discontinuous cervical spondylosis: a finite element analysis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSkip-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been reported to provide favorable outcomes for discontinuous cervical spondylosis; however, intermediate segment degeneration (ASD) remains a concern. Reconstruction of intervertebral height at fused levels may affect postoperative biomechanics, yet the optimal reconstruction strategy remains unclear.
methodsA three-dimensional finite element(FE)model of the cervical spine (C2-C7) was developed. Skip-level ACDF was simulated at C4/5 and C6/7. Six models were analyzed: an intact model (M0) and five postoperative models with reconstructed intervertebral heights of 100%, 125%, 150%, 175%, and 200% of a reference height (M1-M5). A 50 N axial preload and a 1.0 N·m pure moment were applied to simulate flexion, extension, left/right lateral bending, and left/right axial rotation. Outcome measures included cervical range of motion (ROM), peak Von Mises stress of vertebrae and implants, and stress in the intermediate disc (C5/6).
resultsROM at the fused segments decreased markedly in all postoperative models. During lateral bending and axial rotation, ROM and disc stress at non-fused levels-particularly the intermediate segment-generally increased with greater reconstructed height, whereas disc stress tended to decrease or remain relatively stable during extension and right axial rotation. Across most motion directions, the 100% reconstruction model tended to show relatively smaller increases in intermediate-segment ROM and disc stress, while the 125% reconstruction model exhibited relatively lower peak Von Mises stress of the cage and facet joints. Lateral bending produced notably higher peak Von Mises stress of the cage and screw compared with other motion directions.
conclusionsUnder finite element conditions, when the cage height was set to 100% of the reference intervertebral height, the intermediate segment exhibited relatively smaller biomechanical changes in most motion scenarios, suggesting that this reconstruction height may have a limited impact on the intermediate segment. Biomechanical responses of the postoperative intermediate segment and the fixation system varied among different motion directions; in particular, load variation patterns during extension and lateral bending suggest that postoperative motion may influence the mechanical environment of the intermediate segment and implant stability. The clinical relevance of these findings requires further investigation.
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.