Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31584119›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2020

Axial loading during MRI reveals insufficient effect of percutaneous interspinous implants (Aperius™ PerCLID™) on spinal canal area.

Hrafnhildur Hjaltadottir, Hanna Hebelka, Caroline Molinder, Helena Brisby, Adad Baranto

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Hrafnhildur HjaltadottirDepartment of Radiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Hanna HebelkaDepartment of Radiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Caroline MolinderDepartment of Radiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Helena BrisbySahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Adad BarantoSahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden. adad.baranto@vgregion.se.

Funding

ALF-agreement 792231The Swedish state under the agreement between the Swedish government and the country councils 238801
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the effect on the spinal canal at the treated and adjacent level(s), in patients treated for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with percutaneous interspinous process device (IPD) Aperius™ or open decompressive surgery (ODS), using axial loading of the spine during MRI (alMRI). MATERIALS: Nineteen LSS patients (mean age 67 years, range 49-78) treated with IPDs in 29 spine levels and 13 LSS patients (mean age 63 years, range 46-76) operated with ODS in 22 spine levels were examined with alMRI pre- and 3 months postoperatively. Radiological effects were evaluated by measuring the dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCSA) and by morphological grading of nerve root affection.

resultsFor the IPD group, no DSCSA increase was observed at the operated level (p = 0.42); however, a decrease was observed in adjacent levels (p = 0.05). No effect was seen regarding morphological grading (operated level: p = 0.71/adjacent level: p = 0.94). For the ODS group, beneficial effects were seen for the operated level, both regarding DSCSA (p < 0.001) and for morphological grading (p < 0.0001). No changes were seen for adjacent levels (DSCSA; p = 0.47/morphological grading: p = 0.95). Postoperatively, a significant difference between the groups existed at the operated level regarding both evaluated parameters (p < 0.003).

conclusionsWith the spine imaged in an axial loaded position, no significant radiological effects of an IPD could be detected postoperatively at the treated level, while increased DSCSA was displayed for the ODS group. In addition, reduced DSCSA in adjacent levels was detected for the IPD group. Thus, the beneficial effects of IPD implants on the spinal canal must be questioned. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Indexed as

Lumbar VertebraeSpinal CanalSpinal StenosisAgedHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedProstheses and ImplantsTreatment FailureWeight-BearingAxial loading during MRIDecompressionInterspinous process deviceMRISpinal stenosis

Identifiers

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.