Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32803337›Full record

ReviewNeuroradiology2020

Vertebral augmentation with spinal implants: third-generation vertebroplasty.

Danielle Manz, Mark Georgy, Douglas P Beall, Gamal Baroud, Bassem A Georgy, Mario Muto

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neuroradiology, 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
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. A Toolbox of Bone Consolidation for the Interventional Radiologist.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2023
    Review
  4. Vertebral augmentation: an overview.Skeletal radiology · 2023
    Review
  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

6 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Danielle ManzLiberty University College of Osteopathic Medicine, 219 Meadville St, Edinboro, PA, 16444, USA.
Mark GeorgyThe Ohio State University School of Medicine, 2713 Aschinger Blvd, Columbus, OH, 43212, USA.
Douglas P BeallSummit Medical Center, 1800 Renaissance Blvd, Suite 110, Edmond, OK, 73013, USA.
Gamal BaroudBiomechanics Laboratory, 500, boul. de l'Université, Sherbrooke, Québec, J1K 2R1, Canada.
Bassem A GeorgyUniversity of California San Diego, San Diego Imaging, 5458 Coach Lane, San Diego, CA, 92130, USA. bgeorgy@ucsd.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8474-301X
Mario MutoChairman diagnostic and interventional Neuroradiology, Cardarelli Hospital, Naples, Italy.
Alta Bates Summit Medical Center · USFatebenefratelli Hospital · ITLiberty University · USThe Ohio State University · USUniversité de Sherbrooke · CAUniversity of San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article is to review the different types of vertebral augmentation implants recently becoming available for the treatment of benign and malignant spinal compression fractures. After a detailed description of the augmentation implants, we review the available clinical data. We will conclude with a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of vertebral implants and how they can affect the future treatment options of compression fractures.

Indexed as

Prostheses and ImplantsBiomechanical PhenomenaFractures, CompressionHumansSpinal FracturesVertebroplastyCompression fracturesImplantsKyphoplastyVertebroplasty

Identifiers

PMID32803337
OpenAlexW3049681284

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.