Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27113931›Full record

Trial reportJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2016

Reducing surgical levels by paraspinal mapping and diffusion tensor imaging techniques in lumbar spinal stenosis.

Hua-Biao Chen, Qi Wan, Qi-Feng Xu, Yi Chen, Bo Bai

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hua-Biao ChenDepartment of Orthopaedic, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 151 Yanjiang Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Qi WanDepartment of Radiology, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 151 Yanjiang Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Qi-Feng XuDepartment of Electromyography, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 151 Yanjiang Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Yi ChenGuangdong Key Laboratory of Orthopaedic Technology and Implant Materials, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 151 Yanjiang Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Bo BaiDepartment of Orthopaedic, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, 151 Yanjiang Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China. 18620941118@163.com.
Guangzhou Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCorrelating symptoms and physical examination findings with surgical levels based on common imaging results is not reliable. In patients who have no concordance between radiological and clinical symptoms, the surgical levels determined by conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and neurogenic examination (NE) may lead to a more extensive surgery and significant complications. We aimed to confirm that whether the use of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and paraspinal mapping (PM) techniques can further prevent the occurrence of false positives with conventional MRI, distinguish which are clinically relevant from levels of cauda equina and/or nerve root lesions based on MRI, and determine and reduce the decompression levels of lumbar spinal stenosis than MRI + NE, while ensuring or improving surgical outcomes.

methodsWe compared the data between patients who underwent MRI + (PM or DTI) and patients who underwent conventional MRI + NE to determine levels of decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Outcome measures were assessed at 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively.

resultsOne hundred fourteen patients (59 in the control group, 54 in the experimental group) underwent decompression. The levels of decompression determined by MRI + (PM or DTI) in the experimental group were significantly less than that determined by MRI + NE in the control group (p = 0.000). The surgical time, blood loss, and surgical transfusion were significantly less in the experimental group (p = 0.001, p = 0.011, p = 0.001, respectively). There were no differences in improvement of the visual analog scale back and leg pain (VAS-BP, VAS-LP) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores at 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after operation between the experimental and control groups.

conclusionsMRI + (PM or DTI) showed clear benefits in determining decompression levels of lumbar spinal stenosis than MRI + NE. In patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, the use of PM and DTI techniques reduces decompression levels and increases safety and benefits of surgery.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCauda EquinaDecompression, SurgicalDiffusion Tensor ImagingDisability EvaluationElectromyographyFalse Positive ReactionsHumansLumbar VertebraeMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPredictive Value of TestsRadiculopathySingle-Blind MethodDiffuse tensor imaginingLumbar spinal stenosisOswestry Disability IndexParaspinal mappingVisual analog pain scale

Identifiers

PMID27113931
PMCPMC4845428
OpenAlexW2344099863

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.