Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31860651›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar fusion: A systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses.

Yachao Zhao, Sidong Yang, Wenyuan Ding

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation with anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a comparison of postoperative outcomes.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 · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yachao ZhaoDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9002-8485
Sidong YangDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Wenyuan DingDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo carry out a systematic review on the basis of overlapping meta-analyses that compare unilateral with bilateral pedicle screw fixation (PSF) in lumbar fusion to identify which study represents the current best evidence, and to provide recommendations of treatment on this topic.

methodsA comprehensive literature search in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted to identify meta-analyses that compare unilateral with bilateral PSF in lumbar fusion. Only meta-analyses exclusively covering randomized controlled trials were included. Study quality was evaluated using the Oxford Levels of Evidence and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) instrument. Then, the Jadad decision algorithm was applied to select the highest-quality study to represent the current best evidence.

resultsA total of 9 studies with Level II of evidence fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included. The scores of AMSTAR criteria for them varied from 5 to 9 (mean 7.78). The current best evidence detected no significant differences between unilateral and bilateral PSF for short-segment lumbar fusion in the functional scores, length of hospital stay, fusion rate, and complication rate. However, unilateral PSF involved a remarkable decrease in operative time and blood loss but increase of cage migration when compared with bilateral PSF.

conclusionsAccording to this systematic review, unilateral PSF is an effective method of fixation for short-segment lumbar fusion, has the advantages of reduced operative time and blood loss over bilateral PSF, but increases the risk of cage migration.

Indexed as

Pedicle ScrewsBlood Loss, SurgicalHumansIntervertebral Disc DegenerationLength of StayLumbar VertebraeLumbosacral RegionOperative TimeProsthesis FailureSpinal FusionTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID31860651
PMCPMC6924673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.