↓ Skip to main content

Incidence and clinical relevance of cage subsidence in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Neurochirurgica, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
Title
Incidence and clinical relevance of cage subsidence in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review
Published in
Acta Neurochirurgica, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00701-018-3490-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Iris Noordhoek, Marvyn T. Koning, Wilco C. H. Jacobs, Carmen L. A. Vleggeert-Lankamp

Abstract

The placement of intervertebral cages in anterior cervical discectomy (ACDF) supposedly maintains foraminal height. The most commonly reported cage-related complication is subsidence, although it is unknown whether a correlation between subsidence and clinical outcome exists. To assess the incidence and relevance of subsidence. Literature searches were performed in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, COCHRANE, and CENTRAL. The inclusion criteria were as follows: ≥ 20 patients, ADCF with cage, subsidence assessed, and primary data. Risk of bias was assessed using adjusted Cochrane checklists. Seventy-one studies, comprising 4784 patients, were included. Subsidence was generally defined as ≥ 3-mm loss of height comparing postoperative intervertebral heights with heights at last follow-up. Mean incidence of subsidence was 21% (range 0-83%). Of all patients, 46% of patients received polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) cages, 31% received titanium cages, 18% received cage-screw-combinations, and 5% received polymethyl-methacrylate (PMMA) cages. Patients treated with cage-screw-combinations had significantly less subsidence than patients treated with PEEK, titanium, or PMMA cages (15.1% vs. 23.5% vs. 24.9% vs. 30.2%; p < 0.001). Thirteen studies assessed clinical outcome in relation to subsidence; the majority did not find a significant correlation. Only four studies correlated subsidence to cage size and/or height; no correlation was established. Subsidence in ACDF with cages occurs in 21% of patients. The risk for subsidence seems lower using PEEK or titanium cages or adding screws. Whether subsidence affects clinical outcome is not satisfactorily evaluated in the available literature. Future studies on this correlation are warranted in order to establish the additional value of the interposition of a cage in ACDF.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 16%
Researcher 10 11%
Other 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 29 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 33%
Engineering 12 14%
Neuroscience 6 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 36 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 July 2022.
All research outputs
#6,330,354
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neurochirurgica
#441
of 1,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,416
of 330,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neurochirurgica
#5
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,931 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,993 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.