ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2018
Beneficial effects of percutaneous minimally invasive surgery for patients with fractures in the thoracic spine.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomechanics and clinical outcome after posterior stabilization of mid-thoracic vertebral body fractures: a systematic literature review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2021Pooled it
- Outcome Measures of Open versus Minimally Invasive Surgery for Thoracolumbar Spinal Traumatic Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- A comparative study on efficacies of posterior microscopic mini-open and open technique for thoracolumbar burst fractures with severe traumatic spinal stenosis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous minimally invasive surgery (PMIS) is the most common surgical procedure used in patients with fractures in the thoracic spine. In the present study, the benefits of PMIS compared with the conventional open surgery (COS) were investigated in patients with thoracic spine fractures. A total of 84 patients were recruited in the current analysis. Inflammatory responses were measured in all patients subsequent to PMIS and COS. It was demonstrated that PMIS produced reduced inflammatory responses as compared with COS in clinical patients. In addition, the results revealed that kyphosis, anterolisthesis and the neurological state were significantly improved in patients subjected to PMIS compared with those receiving COS (P<0.01). The mean values of bone reduction and fracture correction loss were similar in the PMIS and COS groups (4.5 degrees). Furthermore, the outcomes indicated that the sensitivity for fracture localization to the correct vertebra was 0.90 in PMIS and 0.92 in COS (P>0.05). It was observed that patients who had undergone PMIS required reduced hospitalization time compared with the COS-treated patients (P=0.026). Additionally, the mean bleeding volume during surgery was 538 ml in the PMIS patients and 845 ml in the COS patients. Regarding physical activity, patients who underwent PMIS were relative more active compared with the COS patients (P=0.038) in a 14-day observation. In conclusion, the current clinical analysis indicated that PMIS was more beneficial for the treatment of patients with fractures in the thoracic spine, and the study provided further evidence for the management thoracic spine injuries.
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.