Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33506701›Full record

ArticleActa orthopaedica2021

Reoperations after decompression with or without fusion for L4-5 spinal stenosis with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis: a study of 6,532 patients in Swespine, the national Swedish spine register.

Anders Joelson, Fredrik Nerelius, Marek Holy, Freyr Gauti Sigmundsson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. [Lumbar spinal stenosis].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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.

Anders JoelsonDepartment of Orthopedics, Örebro University School of Medical Sciences and Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.
Fredrik NereliusDepartment of Orthopedics, Örebro University School of Medical Sciences and Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.
Marek HolyDepartment of Orthopedics, Örebro University School of Medical Sciences and Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.
Freyr Gauti SigmundssonDepartment of Orthopedics, Örebro University School of Medical Sciences and Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.
Örebro University Hospital · SEÖrebro University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose - There are different opinions on how to surgically address lumbar spinal stenosis with concomitant degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). We investigated reoperation rates at the index and adjacent levels after L4-5 fusion surgery in a large cohort of unselected patients registered in Swespine, the national Swedish spine register.Patients and methods - 6,532 patients, who underwent surgery for L4-5 spinal stenosis with or without DS between 2007 and 2012, were followed up to 2017 to identify reoperations at the index and adjacent levels. The reoperation rates for decompression and fusion were compared with the reoperation rates for decompression only and for patients with or without DS. Patient-reported outcome data were collected preoperatively, and at 1 and 2 years after surgery and used to evaluate differences in outcome between index operations and reoperations.Results - For spinal stenosis with DS, the reoperation rate at the index level was 3.0% for decompression and fusion and 6.0% for decompression only. At the adjacent level, the corresponding numbers were 9.7% and 4.2% respectively. For spinal stenosis without DS, the reoperation rate at the index level was 3.7% for decompression and fusion and 6.2% after decompression only. At the adjacent level, the corresponding numbers were 8.1% and 3.8% respectively. For the reoperations at the adjacent level, there was no difference in patient-reported outcome between extended fusion or decompression only.Interpretation - Single-level lumbar fusion surgery is associated with an increased rate of reoperations at the adjacent level compared with decompression only. When reoperations at the index level are included there is no difference in reoperation rates between fusion and decompression only.

Indexed as

Decompression, SurgicalLumbar VertebraeSpinal FusionAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRegistriesReoperationSpinal StenosisSpondylolisthesisSwedenTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID33506701
PMCPMC8231344
OpenAlexW3125466331

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.