Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27118374›Full record

ArticleInternational orthopaedics2016

Interspinous dynamic stabilization adjacent to fusion versus double-segment fusion for treatment of lumbar degenerative disease with a minimum follow-up of three years.

Xiao-Long Chen, Li Guan, Yu-Zeng Liu, Jin-Cai Yang, Wen-Long Wang, Yong Hai

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International orthopaedics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Interspinous implants to treat spinal stenosis.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2017
    Review
  19. Article
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xiao-Long ChenDepartment of Orthopedics, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, 8# Gong ti south street, Chao-Yang district, Beijing, 100020, China.
Li GuanDepartment of Orthopedics, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, 8# Gong ti south street, Chao-Yang district, Beijing, 100020, China.
Yu-Zeng LiuDepartment of Orthopedics, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, 8# Gong ti south street, Chao-Yang district, Beijing, 100020, China.
Jin-Cai YangDepartment of Orthopedics, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, 8# Gong ti south street, Chao-Yang district, Beijing, 100020, China.
Wen-Long WangDepartment of Orthopedics, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, 8# Gong ti south street, Chao-Yang district, Beijing, 100020, China.
Yong HaiDepartment of Orthopedics, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, 8# Gong ti south street, Chao-Yang district, Beijing, 100020, China. chensmalldragon@sohu.com.
Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital · CNCapital Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study was to assess the outcome of symptomatic lumbar degenerative disease treated with topping-off technique (Coflex(™) combined with fusion) and compare two-segment fusion at mid-long term follow-up; and find out whether the topping-off technique can reduce the rate of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) after fusion.

methodsOne hundred and fifty-four consecutive patients who received topping-off surgery (76 patients) and two-segment fusion surgery (88 patients) from March 2009 to March 2012 were studied. All patients included in the analysis had a minimum of three years of follow-up. Radiographic and clinical outcomes between the two groups were compared. A logistic regression analysis was used to analyze risk factors for developing radiographic ASD.

resultsSignificant differences in clinical outcomes were observed between these two groups at three post-operative years (all, p < 0.05). Compared with the fusion group, the topping-off group showed preserved mobility at the Coflex(™) level (p = 0.000), which is associated with less blood loss (p = 0.000), shorter duration of surgery (p = 0.000) and lower incidence of ASD (Chi-square test, rate topping-off vs fusion = 13.2 vs 26.1 %, p = 0.039). There were no differences in complications between the two groups.

conclusionMid-long term follow-up efficacy and safety between topping-off and fusion were similar, while topping-off reduced the rate of ASD. Under strict indications, topping-off surgery is an acceptable alternative to fusion surgery for the treatment of two-segment lumbar disease.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLogistic ModelsLumbar VertebraeLumbosacral RegionMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsPostoperative PeriodRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSpinal FusionAdjacent segmentCoflex™Dynamic fixationFusionLumbar

Identifiers

PMID27118374
OpenAlexW2344809069

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.