Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33046537›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2020

Thoracic Endoscopic Spine Surgery: A Comprehensive Review.

Brian Fiani, Imran Siddiqi, Taylor Reardon, Kasra Sarhadi, Alexander Newhouse, Brandon Gilliland, Cyrus Davati, Akash Villait

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Expanding indications of full endoscopic spine surgery.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2023
    Article
  8. Full endoscopic spine surgery.Journal of orthopaedics · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

8 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Brian FianiDesert Regional Medical Center, Palm Springs, California.
Imran SiddiqiWestern University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine, Pomona, California.
Taylor ReardonUniversity of Pikeville, Kentucky College of Osteopathic Medicine, Pikeville, Kentucky.
Kasra SarhadiMiller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida.
Alexander NewhouseRush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
Brandon GillilandAlabama College of Osteopathic Medicine, Dothan, Alabama.
Cyrus DavatiNew York Institute of Technology College of Osteopathic Medicine, Glen Head, New York.
Akash VillaitMidwestern University, Arizona College of Osteopathic Medicine, Glendale, Arizona.
Alabama College of Osteopathic Medicine · USDesert Regional Medical Center · USMidwestern University · USNew York Institute of Technology · USRush University Medical Center · USUniversity of Miami · USUniversity of Pikeville · USWestern University of Health Sciences · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFrom the 1990s, there has been growth in the literature demonstrating the feasibility of minimally invasive approaches for treating diverse spinal disorders. There is still much work to be done in circumnavigating the technical challenges and elucidating relative advantages of endoscopic techniques in spine surgery. In this comprehensive literature review, we discuss the history, advantages, disadvantages, approaches, and technology of, and critically examine peer-reviewed studies specifically addressing, endoscopic thoracic spinal surgery.

methodsLiterature review was conducted with the key words "endoscopic," "minimally invasive," and "thoracic spinal surgery," using PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar.

resultsReview of 241 thorascopic procedures showed a success rate of 98% to 100%, low morbidity, and favorable complication profile. Review of 115 thoracic fixation procedures demonstrated high success rate, and 87% of screw positions were rated "good." Review of 55 full endoscopic uniportal decompressions showed sufficient decompression in most patients. Match pair analysis of 34 patients comparing video-assisted thoracoscopy surgery (VATS) or posterior spinal fusion reported the VATS group had increased operative duration but reduced blood loss.

conclusionsBased on our literature review, there is a high rate of positive outcomes with endoscopic thoracic spine surgery, which reduces tissue dissection, intraoperative blood loss, and epidural fibrosis. However, the technical challenge highlights the importance of further training and innovation in this rapidly evolving field. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There is growing evidence demonstrating the success of endoscopic thoracic spinal surgery. Populations that could be helped include the elderly and immunocompromised, who would benefit from decreased hospital stay and enhanced recovery time.

Indexed as

endoscopicminimally invasivethoracic spine

Identifiers

PMID33046537
PMCPMC7671455
OpenAlexW3091857669

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.