ReviewGlobal spine journal2026
Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Laminectomy With Fusion Versus Laminoplasty in Multilevel Cervical Myelopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.
Review in Global spine journal, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.ObjectivesTo compare the efficacy and safety of laminoplasty (LP) versus laminectomy with instrumented fusion (LF) for multilevel degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).MethodsFollowing PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library for studies. Primary outcomes included functional recovery (mJOA), disability (NDI), neck pain (VAS), and quality of life (SF-36). Secondary outcomes included radiographic markers, perioperative metrics, and complications. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).ResultsEighteen studies involving 1,488 patients were included. Outcomes were broadly comparable. mJOA showed a statistically significant but small difference (MD: -0.34; 95% CI: -0.43 to -0.25; p < 0.00001), while NDI did not differ significantly (p = 0.42). LF was associated with a statistically significant but clinically small reduction in VAS neck pain (MD: -0.18; 95% CI: -0.32 to -0.05; p = 0.007). LP preserved greater cervical range of motion (p = 0.0005) and was associated with lower T1 slope (p = 0.0004), lower blood loss (p = 0.002), and shorter operative time (p = 0.002), although perioperative differences were modest. LF was associated with higher C5 palsy risk (OR: 3.30; 95% CI: 1.88-5.78; p < 0.0001). Hospital stay, reoperation rate, and SF-36 did not differ significantly.ConclusionLF and LP provide broadly comparable functional outcomes in multilevel DCM. Because included studies were largely observational and several outcomes were heterogeneous, procedure selection should be individualized according to sagittal alignment, instability, OPLL burden, motion-preservation goals, axial pain, and surgical risk.
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.