ArticleJournal of bone oncology2018
Evaluation of short-term efficacy of extraspinal cementoplasty for bone metastasis: A monocenter study of 31 patients.
Article in Journal of bone oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effectiveness and safety of tripod-enhanced percutaneous reconstruction combined with local tumour inactivation for periacetabular metastases: a long-term follow-up study.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Mechanisms and protective factors of pulmonary cement embolism associated with percutaneous cementoplasty for bone metastasis in the pelvis: A retro-prospective study.Skeletal radiology · 2026Article
- Percutaneous-Reinforced Osteoplasty: A Review of Emerging Treatment Strategies for Bone Interventions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Interventional Radiology in the Management of Metastases and Bone Tumors.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Emerging Concepts in the Surgical Management of Peri-Acetabular Metastatic Bone Disease.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo study the effect on pain of per-cutaneous cementoplasty for painful extraspinal bone metastasis.
method43 patients with extraspinal bone metastasis were included between April 2006 and October 2014 in this retrospective monocenter study. The primary endpoint was pain level measured on a 0-10 numeric rating scale at week 1 after cementoplasty as compared with pre-cementoplasty. Secondary endpoints were long-term pain level and impact on quality of life and disability.
resultsMean pain score was 4.2 (SD ±3.6) before cementoplasty and 1.09 (SD ±2.4) at week 1 (
conclusionPercutaneous cementoplasty of extraspinal bone metastasis is a rapidly efficient treatment with few adverse events. Its efficacy persists over time, with a benefit for disability and quality of life. Although this technique is only palliative, it should be considered in this situation.
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.