ArticleJOR spine2026
The Effect of Single Level and Multilevel Cervical Fusion on Adjacent Segment Motion: A Biomechanical Analysis.
Article in JOR 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.
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
Background: Cervical arthrodesis is a common surgical technique utilized to treat many cervical spinal pathologies. The risk of re-operation due to symptomatic adjacent segment disease (ASD) remains steady, and the cause of ASD, whether rigid fixation or disease progression, remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to develop a cervical fusion model and analyze motion of the subaxial cervical spine adjacent segments following single level, two-level, and three-level spine fusion. Methods: A in vitro cervical arthrodesis biomechanics model was developed utilizing nine fresh-frozen cervical spine specimens. Each spine underwent non-destructive testing in flexion, extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending using a six degree-of-freedom robotic manipulator. Following intact specimen testing, testing was repeated after C5-C6, C4-C6, C5-C7, C4-C7 fusions. Changes in range of motion among tests were calculated at each segment. Results: The cervical arthrodesis model showed reduced motion significantly at all fused levels. Following single level fusion at C5-C6, no statistically significant increases in adjacent segment motion occurred in any testing condition ( Conclusion: We successfully developed a rigid cervical arthrodesis model and tested specimens in single, two-level, and three-level cervical fusion. No increases were found in adjacent segments following single level fusion and non-contiguous motion was increased following C4-6 fusion. Three-level fusion showed the greatest change in adjacent segment motion.
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.