SynthesisInternational orthopaedics2016
Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in short-segment lumbar spinal fusion: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in International orthopaedics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Is unilateral pedicle screw fixation as effective as bilateral pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023Pooled it
- Fusion in situ versus reduction for spondylolisthesis treatment: grading the evidence through a meta-analysis.Bioscience reports · 2020Pooled it
- Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar fusion: A systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Is unilateral pedicle screw fixation superior than bilateral pedicle screw fixation for lumbar degenerative diseases: a meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Article
- Rigid reconstruction with periacetabular multiple screws after the resection of malignant pelvic tumours involving the sacroiliac joint.International orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Comparison of unilateral pedicle screw fixation and interbody fusion with PEEK cage vs. standalone expandable fusion cage for the treatment of unilateral lumbar disc herniation.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2018Article
- Incidence and risk factors for the misplacement of pedicle screws in scoliosis surgery assisted by O-arm navigation-analysis of a large series of one thousand, one hundred and forty five screws.International orthopaedics · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe performed this meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to compare the efficacy and safety of unilateral with bilateral fixation in short-segment lumbar spinal fusion.
methodsPredefined terms were used to search electronic databases to identify relevant research. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English and Chinese during 1990-2015 investigating efficacy and safety of unilateral and bilateral fixation in short-segment lumbar spinal fusion were included. Data of fusion rate, complications, visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), estimated blood loss (EBL) and length of hospital stay were extracted and analysed. Two reviewers independently searched information sources, selected eligible research, analysed data and evaluated risk of bias.
resultsEleven RCTs comprising 756 participants were analysed. There was no significant difference in fusion rate, device-related complication, ODI, VAS and length of hospital stay between bilateral and unilateral groups. The unilateral group had the obvious advantage of reduced blood loss [mean difference (MD) -143.57, 95 % confidence interval (Cl) -206.61 to -80.54, P < 0.0001) and operation time (MD -52.72, 95 % Cl -73.58 to -31.87, P < 0.00001).
conclusionUnilateral pedicle screw fixation is equally as effective as bilateral pedicle screw fixation in short-segment lumbar spinal fusion and may reduce operation time and blood loss.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26174053What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.