International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research  |  e-ISSN: 2582-8940  |  Double-Blind Peer Review  |  Open Access  |  CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

Current Issues
     2026:7/4

International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research

e-ISSN: 2582-8940 | Open Access

Clinical Characteristics, Radiological Findings, and Treatment Outcomes in Reversed Cervical Lordosis: A Systematic Review

Sarah Zuhair Kurdi, Rafal Razzaq Al-Khalidi

Kufa University-Medical College, Najaf, Iraq; Department of surgery, Jabir Ibn Hayyan University for Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Najaf, Iraq

Article Information

Volume / Issue6 / 3 (July-September 2025)
Pages277-280
AccessOpen Access

Publication Timeline

  • Received25 May 2025
  • Accepted26 June 2025
  • Published

Full Text (PDF)

Open Access - Free to Download

Download Full Article (PDF) JATS XML

Abstract

Background: Reversed cervical lordosis (RCL) is a pathological condition characterized by a reversal of the normal cervical spine curvature, resulting in kyphosis. This deformity is frequently associated with chronic neck pain, neurological deficits, and functional limitations. Despite its clinical relevance, research regarding standardized diagnostic criteria, clinical manifestations, imaging features, and therapeutic outcomes remains scattered.
Objective: This systematic review aims to comprehensively synthesize current evidence on the clinical presentations, radiological characteristics, and both conservative and surgical treatment outcomes in patients diagnosed with reversed cervical lordosis.
Methods: A thorough search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science databases for studies published between January 2000 and December 2023. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case series with at least five patients, focusing on human subjects diagnosed with RCL. Data extracted encompassed patient demographics, diagnostic parameters such as Cobb angle measurements, clinical symptoms, treatment modalities, outcome measures including pain and disability indices, and follow-up durations. The methodological quality of included studies was appraised using established assessment tools.
Results: Fifteen studies encompassing 645 patients met the inclusion criteria. Common clinical findings included persistent neck pain, limited cervical mobility, and radicular symptoms in some cases. Radiologically, RCL was primarily identified by a negative Cobb angle on lateral cervical radiographs. Conservative management approaches, such as physical therapy and cervical traction, demonstrated modest benefits in symptom relief and alignment correction over short to medium-term follow-up. Surgical interventions, notably anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior fusion procedures, provided significant improvements in cervical alignment and clinical outcomes, particularly among patients with severe or refractory symptoms.
Conclusion: Reversed cervical lordosis represents a clinically significant deformity that necessitates early recognition and appropriate management. While both conservative and surgical treatments offer benefits, surgical correction may yield superior radiological and functional outcomes in selected patients. Further high-quality research is needed to establish uniform diagnostic criteria and to evaluate long-term treatment efficacy.
 

Keywords

Reversed Cervical LordosisCervical KyphosisSystematic ReviewACDFPhysical TherapyCobb AngleNeck Pain

References

  1. Moustafa IM, et al. Cervical extension traction in cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: A randomized controlled trial. Eur Spine J. 2022;31(7):1617–1626. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  2. Moustafa IM, et al. Correction of cervical lordosis in chronic neck pain: Randomized trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2021a;51(4):163–171. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  3. Moustafa IM, et al. Effects of extension traction on asymptomatic adults: RCT. Clin Neurophysiol. 2021b;132(2):345–352. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  4. Moustafa IM, et al. Cervical traction and physical therapy for cervicogenic headache: RCT. J Headache Pain. 2021c;22(1):68. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  5. Lee SH, et al. Surgical correction of cervical deformity: Literature review. Spine J. 2010;10(7):670–678. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  6. Wu JC, et al. Revision surgery for postoperative cervical deformity: Cohort study. World Neurosurg. 2021;147:e18–e25. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  7. Smith JS, et al. Multi-level osteotomy for adult cervical deformity: Prospective cohort. Spine Deform. 2017;5(5):324–332. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  8. Tetreault L, et al. Surgical approach comparison for cervical myelopathy: Systematic review. Global Spine J. 2017;7(3_suppl):76S–84S. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  9. Passias PG, et al. Realignment surgery outcomes for cervical deformity: Multicenter cohort. Neurosurgery. 2018;82(3):361–368. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  10. Kwon BK, et al. Surgical versus conservative treatment in cervical kyphosis: Systematic review. J Neurosurg Spine. 2021;35(4):482–491. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  11. Wells GA, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa Health Research Institute. 2000. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  12. Joanna Briggs Institute. Critical appraisal tools for use in JBI systematic reviews: Checklist for case series. 2017. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  13. Buell TJ, et al. Surgical strategies for cervical deformity: Review. Neurosurg Focus. 2019;46(6):E4. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  14. Lenke LG, et al. Cervical osteotomy for adult cervical deformity: Retrospective study. Spine Deform. 2017;5(3):194–202. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  15. Koller H, et al. Congenital cervical kyphosis deformity correction: Case series. Eur Spine J. 2010;19(5):734– 742. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  16. Faldini C, et al. Posterior fusion for NF1-associated cervical kyphosis: Case series. Spine J. 2011;11(11):1037–1043. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  17. Kim HJ, Lenke LG. Diagnosis and management of cervical deformity: Clinical guidelines. Spine Deform. 2016;4(1):1–13. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  18. Passias PG, et al. Cervical sagittal alignment and clinical outcomes: A review. Global Spine J. 2017;7(6):513– 523. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  19. Smith JS, et al. Impact of cervical alignment on patient outcomes: Review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015;40(5):361–369. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  20. Fehlings MG, et al. Biomechanical and neurological implications of cervical alignment: Review. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;19(5):526–535. [Google Scholar][Crossref]

How to Cite

Kurdi, S. Z., & Al-Khalidi, R. R. (2025). Clinical Characteristics, Radiological Findings, and Treatment Outcomes in Reversed Cervical Lordosis: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research, 6(3), 277-280. https://doi.org/10.54660/IJMBHR.2025.6.3.277-280

Kurdi, Sarah Zuhair, and Rafal Razzaq Al-Khalidi. "Clinical Characteristics, Radiological Findings, and Treatment Outcomes in Reversed Cervical Lordosis: A Systematic Review." International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research, vol. 6, no. 3, 2025, pp. 277-280. https://doi.org/10.54660/IJMBHR.2025.6.3.277-280.

Kurdi, S. Z. and Al-Khalidi, R. R. (2025) 'Clinical Characteristics, Radiological Findings, and Treatment Outcomes in Reversed Cervical Lordosis: A Systematic Review', International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research, 6(3), pp. 277-280. doi: 10.54660/IJMBHR.2025.6.3.277-280.

Kurdi SZ, Al-Khalidi RR. Clinical Characteristics, Radiological Findings, and Treatment Outcomes in Reversed Cervical Lordosis: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research. 2025;6(3):277-280. doi:10.54660/IJMBHR.2025.6.3.277-280

Similar Articles

Share

Find this Article on

Google Scholar Semantic Scholar OpenAlex Scilit Crossref ResearchGate BASE

A newly published article may take a few days to appear on these services.