FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2007115008> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2007115008 endingPage "S194" @default.
• W2007115008 startingPage "S183" @default.
• W2007115008 abstract "In Brief Study Design. Systematic review. Objective. To determine the effectiveness and safety of cervical laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical myelopathy, and to identify any patient subgroups for whom one treatment may result in better outcomes than the other. Summary of Background Data. Cervical laminoplasty and cervical laminectomy plus fusion are both procedures that treat cervical stenosis induced myelopathy by expanding the space available for the spinal cord. Although there are strong proponents of each procedure, the effectiveness, safety, and differential effectiveness and safety of laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion remains unclear. Methods. A systematic search of multiple major medical reference databases was conducted to identify studies that compared laminoplasty with laminectomy and fusion. Studies could include either or both cervical myelopathic spondylosis (CSM) and ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were included. Case reports and studies with less than 10 patients in the comparative group were excluded. Japanese Orthopaedic Association, modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association, and Nurick scores were the primary outcomes measuring myelopathy effectiveness. Reoperation and complication rates were evaluated for safety. Clinical recommendations were made through a modified Delphi approach by applying the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation/Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality criteria. Results. The search strategy yielded 305 citations, and 4 retrospective cohort studies ultimately met our inclusion criteria. For patients with CSM, data from 3 class of evidence III retrospective cohort studies suggest that there is no difference between treatment groups in severity of myelopathy or pain: 2 studies reported no significant difference between treatment groups in severity of myelopathy, and 3 studies found no significant difference in pain outcomes between treatment groups. For patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, one small class of evidence III retrospective cohort study reported significant improvements in myelopathy severity after laminectomy and fusion compared with laminoplasty, but no differences in long-term pain between treatment groups. The overall evidence on the comparative safety of laminoplasty compared with laminectomy and fusion is inconsistent. Reoperation rates were lower after laminoplasty in 2 of 3 studies reporting. However, the incidence of debilitating neck pain was higher after laminoplasty as reported by one study; results on neurological complications were inconclusive, with 2 studies reporting. Results on kyphotic deformity were inconsistent, with opposite results in the 2 studies reporting. After laminectomy and fusion, 1% to 38% of patients had pseudarthrosis. Infection rates were slightly lower after laminoplasty, but the results are not likely to be statistically significant. Conclusion. For patients with CSM, there is low-quality evidence that suggests that laminoplasty and laminectomy and fusion procedures are similarly effective in treating CSM. For patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, the evidence regarding the effectiveness of these procedures is insufficient. For both patient populations, the evidence as to whether one procedure is safer than the other is insufficient. Higher-quality research is necessary to more clearly delineate when one procedure is preferred compared with the other. Evidence-Based Clinical Recommendations. Recommendation. For CSM, evidence suggests that laminoplasty and laminectomy-fusion procedures can be similarly effective. We suggest that surgeons consider each case individually and take into account their own familiarity and expertise with each procedure. Overall Strength of Evidence. Low Strength of Recommendation. Weak A systematic review of the literature suggests that laminoplasty and laminectomy and fusion procedures are similarly effective in treating cervical myelopathic spondylosis (CSM), whereas the evidence is insufficient to draw a conclusion regarding the effectiveness of these procedures in patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). The evidence regarding the safety of these procedures in both patients with CSM and patients with OPLL is insufficient to draw a conclusion. Further research is necessary to better delineate when one procedure is preferred over the other." @default.
• W2007115008 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2007115008 creator A5035896013 @default.
• W2007115008 creator A5036052682 @default.
• W2007115008 creator A5043686090 @default.
• W2007115008 creator A5062744165 @default.
• W2007115008 creator A5063382272 @default.
• W2007115008 creator A5076966621 @default.
• W2007115008 date "2013-10-01" @default.
• W2007115008 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2007115008 title "Outcomes After Laminoplasty Compared With Laminectomy and Fusion in Patients With Cervical Myelopathy" @default.
• W2007115008 cites W1577474225 @default.
• W2007115008 cites W1989127270 @default.
• W2007115008 cites W1999174228 @default.
• W2007115008 cites W2014876787 @default.
• W2007115008 cites W2024099589 @default.
• W2007115008 cites W2033345549 @default.
• W2007115008 cites W2072307799 @default.
• W2007115008 cites W2114864896 @default.
• W2007115008 cites W2329936965 @default.
• W2007115008 cites W2411561362 @default.
• W2007115008 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0b013e3182a7eb7c" @default.
• W2007115008 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23963000" @default.
• W2007115008 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W2007115008 type Work @default.
• W2007115008 sameAs 2007115008 @default.
• W2007115008 citedByCount "91" @default.
• W2007115008 countsByYear W20071150082014 @default.
• W2007115008 countsByYear W20071150082015 @default.
• W2007115008 countsByYear W20071150082016 @default.
• W2007115008 countsByYear W20071150082017 @default.
• W2007115008 countsByYear W20071150082018 @default.
• W2007115008 countsByYear W20071150082019 @default.
• W2007115008 countsByYear W20071150082020 @default.
• W2007115008 countsByYear W20071150082021 @default.
• W2007115008 countsByYear W20071150082022 @default.
• W2007115008 countsByYear W20071150082023 @default.
• W2007115008 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2007115008 hasAuthorship W2007115008A5035896013 @default.
• W2007115008 hasAuthorship W2007115008A5036052682 @default.
• W2007115008 hasAuthorship W2007115008A5043686090 @default.
• W2007115008 hasAuthorship W2007115008A5062744165 @default.
• W2007115008 hasAuthorship W2007115008A5063382272 @default.
• W2007115008 hasAuthorship W2007115008A5076966621 @default.
• W2007115008 hasBestOaLocation W20071150081 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C167135981 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C2777604421 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C2778019773 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C2778284751 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C2780091945 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C2780775167 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C118552586 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C141071460 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C142724271 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C167135981 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C204787440 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C2777604421 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C2778019773 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C2778284751 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C2780091945 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C2780775167 @default.
• W2007115008 hasConceptScore W2007115008C71924100 @default.
• W2007115008 hasLocation W20071150081 @default.
• W2007115008 hasLocation W20071150082 @default.
• W2007115008 hasOpenAccess W2007115008 @default.
• W2007115008 hasPrimaryLocation W20071150081 @default.
• W2007115008 hasRelatedWork W1812877804 @default.
• W2007115008 hasRelatedWork W1992450947 @default.
• W2007115008 hasRelatedWork W2005220959 @default.
• W2007115008 hasRelatedWork W2079704478 @default.
• W2007115008 hasRelatedWork W2081160628 @default.
• W2007115008 hasRelatedWork W2257347725 @default.
• W2007115008 hasRelatedWork W2317864111 @default.
• W2007115008 hasRelatedWork W2318549122 @default.
• W2007115008 hasRelatedWork W2361488267 @default.
• W2007115008 hasRelatedWork W3174793920 @default.
• W2007115008 hasVolume "38" @default.
• W2007115008 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2007115008 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2007115008 magId "2007115008" @default.
• W2007115008 workType "article" @default.