ArticleAsian spine journal2021
Does Percutaneous Lumbosacral Pedicle Screw Instrumentation Prevent Long-Term Adjacent Segment Disease after Lumbar Fusion?
Article in Asian spine journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment Concept and Technical Considerations of Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Asian spine journal · 2024Article
- Biomedical Applications of Titanium Alloys: A Comprehensive Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective cohort study. PURPOSE: To assess long-term clinical outcomes of adjacent segment disease (ASD) in patients who underwent lumbar interbody fusion with percutaneous pedicle screw (PS) instrumentation. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: ASD is a well-known sequela of spinal fusion, and is reported to occur at a rate of 2%-3% per year. There is debate as to whether ASD is a result of the instrumentation and fusion method or is the natural history of the patient's disease. Minimally invasive percutaneous PS augmentation of lumbar interbody fusion aims to prevent the disruption of posterior soft tissue stabilizers.
methodsFrom 2004-2014, 419 consecutive patients underwent anterior, lateral, or minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with percutaneous PS placement at a single institution. The mean follow-up was 4.5 years. The primary outcome measure was reoperation due to ASD. Patients were divided into two cohorts: those who underwent revision surgery secondary to ASD and those who did not require further surgery. Radiographic parameters were performed using postoperative radiographs. Patients with a pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch >10° were noted.
resultsRevision proportion secondary to ASD was 4.77% (n=20). Mean time to revision surgery was 2.5 years. Revision rate secondary to ASD was 1.1% per year. Patients who developed ASD were younger than those who did not (50.5 vs. 56.9 years, p=0.015). There was no difference in number of levels fused between cohorts. Revision proportion secondary to ASD was similar between approaches (anterior, lateral, minimally invasive). There was no significant difference in PI-LL mismatch between those who underwent revision for ASD and those who did not (22.2% vs. 18.8%, p=0.758).
conclusionsASD rates in patients who underwent percutaneous PS placement were lower than those previously published after open PS placement, possibly related to greater preservation of the posterior stabilizing elements of the lumbar spine.
Indexed as
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.