ReviewCureus2021
The Effect of Thoracolumbar Injury Classification in the Clinical Outcome of Operative and Non-Operative Treatments.
Review in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive value of the risk analysis index for 30-day mortality following surgical management of thoracolumbar vertebral body fractures.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 · 2026Article
- Diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of mTLICS versus TLICS and TL AOSIS in stratifying three-tier treatment for thoracolumbar injuries: focus on intermediate score range.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Thoracolumbar spine trauma: a guide for the FRCS examination.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023Article
- How Should Patients with a Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score of 4 Be Treated?Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Unstable thoracolumbar injuries: A bibliometric analysis of the most influential papers.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review assesses the validity of a biomechanical approach using finite element analysis in the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score System (TLICS) by addressing the "gray zone" decision discrepancy of thoracolumbar spinal injuries. A systematic review was performed using the keywords "Thoracolumbar Injury Classification" AND "finite element analysis of the spinal column" to evaluate the validity of the TLICS and finite element analysis of the thoracolumbar spinal column. Results were classified according to the main conclusions and level of evidence. Thirteen articles are included. Four of the articles evaluated the TLICS in comparison to other classification systems of thoracolumbar spinal injuries. A notable finding is that the TLICS had inconsistencies with other classification systems in the treatment of burst fractures without neurological deficits. One article evaluated the TLICS with the inclusion of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the evaluation, which decreased the agreement between the suggested and actual treatment. Among the three finite element analysis studies, limited data have been published on the posterior ligamentous complex (PLC) status when an injury is suspected or indeterminate. The TLICS has been a reliable classification system in the management of single-column fractures and three-column injuries treated with surgical stabilization. Special attention to enhancing the TLICS classification system by eliminating the "gray zone" of a TLICS score of 4 is essential. Biomedical computational modeling evaluating the PLC status of indeterminate or injury suspected is needed to enhance the current TLICS system and to clarify the decision discrepancy in the "gray zone."
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.