Table 2.
Common characteristics about studies included in the systematic review
Source | Country | Published year | Study design | Disease | No. of patients | No. of levels (mean) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | P | Total | A | P | |||||
Kristof et al. [28] | Germany | 2009 | NRCT | CSM | 42 | 61 | 103 | 2 | 3 |
Bapat et al. [30] | India | 2008 | NRCT | CSM | 20 | 25 | 45 | 3.0 | 3.2 |
Edwards et al. [34] | USA | 2001 | Cohort | CM | 13 | 13 | 26 | ≥3 | ≥3 |
Wada et al. [35] | Japan | 2001 | NRCT | CSM | 23 | 24 | 47 | 2.3 | 2.5 |
Yonenobu et al. [37] | Japan | 1992 | NRCT | CSM | 41 | 42 | 83 | 2.5 | 2.6 |
Lee et al. [29] | South Korea | 2008 | NRCT | OPLL | 20 | 27 | 47 | 3.4 | 5.5 |
Iwasaki et al. [31] | Japan | 2007 | NRCT | OPLL | 27 | 66 | 93 | 3.0 | 5.7 |
Jain et al. [32] | India | 2005 | NRCT | OPLL | 14 | 13 | 27 | ≥4 | ≥4 |
Tani et al. [33] | Japan | 2002 | NRCT | OPLL | 14 | 12 | 26 | 3.2 | 5.6 |
Goto and Gita [36] | Japan | 1995 | NRCT | OPLL | 7 | 57 | 64 | ≥3 | ≥3 |
NRCT non-randomized controlled clinical trial, OPLL multilevel cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, CSM multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy, MCM multilevel cervical myelopathy, No. number