ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2019
Mini-open sacroiliac joint fusion with direct bone grafting and minimally invasive fixation using intraoperative navigation.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utility of minimally invasive percutaneous arthrodesis of the sacroiliac joint for the treatment of low back pain: systematic review of the literature.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Pooled it
- Minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical outcome measures following lateral versus posterior sacroiliac joint fusion: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- American Society of Pain and Neuroscience Best Practice (ASPN) Guideline for the Treatment of Sacroiliac Disorders.Journal of pain research · 2024Review
- Minimally Invasive SI Joint Fusion Procedures for Chronic SI Joint Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Safety and Efficacy.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Posterior oblique technique for sacroiliac joint fusion leads to greater pain relief and similar improvement in function compared to the lateral technique: A retrospective, comparative study.North American Spine Society journal · 2023Article
- Patient-Reported and Radiographic Outcomes After Revision Sacroiliac Joint Fusion.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Letter to the Editor: "Biomechanical Stability of the Sacroiliac Joint With Differing Impact Configurations in a Synthetic Model".International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: Fusion Rates and Clinical Improvement Using Minimally Invasive Approach and Intraoperative Navigation and Robotic Guidance.Asian spine journal · 2022Article
- Surgical and clinical efficacy of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion surgery: a meta-analysis protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Advances in Pain Medicine: a Review of New Technologies.Current pain and headache reports · 2022Review
- Article
- Robot-assisted revision of sacroiliac joint fusion using a triangular titanium implant in an S2-alar-iliac trajectory: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2021Article
- International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery Policy 2020 Update-Minimally Invasive Surgical Sacroiliac Joint Fusion (for Chronic Sacroiliac Joint Pain): Coverage Indications, Limitations, and Medical Necessity.International journal of spine surgery · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDescribe a novel technique for sacroiliac arthrodesis using intraoperative navigation, direct bone grafting, and minimally invasive implants. Report on the outcomes of the first cohort of these patients.
methodsInstitutional review board (IRB) approved, single center, two surgeon, retrospective study.
resultsAll patients were 18 years or older, primary sacroiliac fusions, and underwent novel technique described. Fifty patients underwent 57 surgeries. Twelve male/38 female patients. All received three sacroiliac implants. Average blood loss 42.8 mL. Average length of stay 1.9 nights. Average follow-up 13.96±13 months. Statistically significant improvements in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores (<0.001) for all time periods 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months compared to preop. Other outcomes scores [Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Denver Sacroiliac Joint Questionnaire (DSIJQ)] also showed a general trend for clinical improvement at all postoperative time periods. Of 2/57 (3.5%) complications were identified. No patients required surgical revision within the study window.
conclusionsLimited open sacroiliac arthrodesis using minimally invasive implants, intraoperative navigation, and direct open bone grafting is safe and demonstrates clinical benefit, similar to other techniques for minimally invasive sacroiliac arthrodesis. There is potential for improved long-term outcomes from increased union rates. KEYWORDS: Sacroiliac dysfunction; minimally invasive sacroiliac fusion; open sacroiliac fusion; navigation.
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.