Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31927623›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

Revision strategies for failed adult spinal deformity surgery.

Carlotta Martini, Francesco Langella, Luca Mazzucchelli, Claudio Lamartina

Abstract 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. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Carlotta MartiniGSpine4, I.R.C.C.S. Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy. martini.carlotta@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-3395-8058
Francesco LangellaGSpine4, I.R.C.C.S. Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Luca MazzucchelliDepartment of Orthopaedic and Traumatology, Orthopaedic and Trauma Centre, Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Claudio LamartinaGSpine4, I.R.C.C.S. Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi · ITUniversity of Turin · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study is to analyse the results of revision surgery for failed adult spinal deformity patients and to describe the surgical strategy selection process, based on the identification of the main clinical diagnosis responsible for failure.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the clinical and radiological data of 77 consecutive patients treated in a 3-year time (2016-2019) for surgical revision of long fusion (more than five levels fused) for adult spinal deformity in a high-volume spine centre, divided into four groups based on the diagnosis: rod breakage (RB) group, proximal junctional failure (PJF) group, distal junctional failure (DJF) group and loss of correction (LOC) group with symptomatic sagittal or coronal malalignment (including iatrogenic flatback).

resultsSeventy-seven patients met our inclusion criteria, with a female prevalence (66 F vs. 11 M). The mean age at revision surgery was 63. Fused levels before surgery were averagely 12, and revision added averagely two levels to the preexisting fusion area. Clinical status was apparently improved in ODI scores and VAS scores, while it was slightly worsened in SF36 scores. Different diagnosis groups have been addressed with different surgical strategies, according to the different surgical goals: interbody cages and multi-rod construct to improve stiffness and favour bony fusion, "kickstand" rod and "tie" rod to correct coronal and sagittal malalignment, specific rod contouring and proximal hooks in "claw" configuration to reduce mechanical stress at the proximal junctional area. Intraoperative complications occurred in 18% of patients and perioperative complications in 39%.

conclusionRevision surgery in long fusions for adult spinal deformity is a challenging field. Surgical strategy should always be planned carefully. A successful treatment is a direct consequence of a correct preoperative diagnosis, and surgery should address the primary cause of failure. All the above-mentioned surgical techniques and clinical skills should be part of surgeon's expertise when managing these patients. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Indexed as

ReoperationFemaleHumansIntraoperative ComplicationsMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesSpinal DiseasesSpinal FusionSpineTreatment FailureComplicationsDistal kyphosisJunctional kyphosisNon-unionRevision surgerySpinal deformity

Identifiers

PMID31927623
OpenAlexW2999411787

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.