ArticleDysphagia2026
Dysphagia Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A PearlDiver Analysis of Incidence, Risk Factors, and Interventions.
Article in Dysphagia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- National Trends and Risk Factors for Dysphagia After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Reduced hypopharyngeal muscle strength in patients with dysphagia symptoms after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a well-established surgical procedure, with wide variation in reported postoperative dysphagia rates (1-79%). No standardized guidelines exist for screening, diagnosis, and treatment of postoperative ACDF dysphagia. The goal of the current study is to utilize a large database of US healthcare insurance claims to investigate incidence of dysphagia post-ACDF as well as risk factors for dysphagia and interventions performed in a large patient cohort. PearlDiver database was used to identify patients without preoperative dysphagia undergoing ACDF between 2010 and 2022 and create cohorts of patients with and without postoperative ACDF dysphagia. International Classification of Disease version 9 and 10 (ICD-9 and ICD-10), and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to retrieve patient records. The two cohorts were compared in terms of age, gender, comorbidities, prior neck surgery, postoperative vocal fold paralysis, and dysphagia related interventions. OR with 95% CI were calculated, stratifying by various risk factors. Prevalence of various postoperative diagnoses and interventions were calculated. Of 618,170 patients undergoing primary ACDF from 2010 to 2022, 88,899 (14.4%) developed postoperative dysphagia. Females, smokers, diabetics, and obese patients had higher odds of developing post ACDF dysphagia (OR 1.14, 2.51, 2.18, 2.50 respectively). 3% of patients with post ACDF dysphagia had new postoperative vocal fold motion impairment (VFMI) versus 0.3% without dysphagia (OR 8.69). Within the dysphagia cohort,14.9% underwent laryngoscopy, 19.0% underwent MBSS, 0.80% underwent FEES, and 5.2% received swallow therapy. Dysphagia is commonly diagnosed after ACDF, with females, smokers, diabetics, and obese patients having the highest odds of diagnosis. Yet, a low percentage of patients are being referred for evaluation or treatment. Providers performing ACDF should consider screening protocols and early referral to providers offering interventions for dysphagia diagnosis and treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40775465What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.