ArticleAsian spine journal2019
Palliative Posterior Instrumentation versus Corpectomy with Cage Reconstruction Treatment for Thoracolumbar Pathological Fracture.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designSingle-center, retrospective cohort study. PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes in patients who underwent palliative posterior instrumentation (PPI) versus those who underwent corpectomy with cage reconstruction (CCR) for thoracolumbar pathological fracture. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The requirement for anterior support after corpectomy has been emphasized in the treatment of pathological fractures of the vertebrae. However, for patients with a relatively short life expectancy, anterior reconstruction may not be required and posterior instrumentation alone may provide adequate stabilization.
methodsA total of 43 patients with metastases of the thoracolumbar spine underwent surgery in the department of orthopaedic and traumatology of Istanbul University Faculty of Medicine from 2003 to 2016. Surgical outcomes were assessed on the basis of survival status, pre- and postoperative pain, complication rate, and operation time.
resultsPPI was performed for 22 patients and CCR was performed for 21 patients. In the PPI group, the follow-up period of the five surviving patients was 32 months. The remaining 17 patients died with a mean survival duration of 12.3 months postoperatively. In the CCR group, the five surviving patients were followed up for an average of 14.1 months. The remaining 16 patients died with a mean survival duration of 18.7 months postoperatively. No statistically significant difference (p=0.812) was noted in the survival duration. The Visual Analog Scale scores of the patients were significantly reduced after both procedures, with no significant difference noted on the basis of the type of surgical intervention (p>0.05). The complication rate in the CCR group (33.3%) was higher compared with that in the PPI group (22.7%); however, this difference was not noted to be statistically significant (p=0.379). The average operation time in the PPI group (149 minutes) was significantly shorter (p=0.04) than that in the CCR group (192 minutes).
conclusionsThe PPI technique can decompress the tumor for functional improvement and can stabilize the spinal structure to provide pain relief.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.