Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33560256›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2020

Reliability and Clinical Usefulness of Current Classifications in Traumatic Thoracolumbar Fractures: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

I Curfs, M Schotanus, W L W VAN Hemert, M Heijmans, R A DE Bie, L W VAN Rhijn, P C P H Willems

Abstract 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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Most AOTL type A and type B thoracolumbar primary fracture line follow the mechanism of an imaging-based injury model.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 · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

7 authors.

I CurfsZuyderland Medical Centre, Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Heerlen, Netherlands.
M SchotanusZuyderland Medical Centre, Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Heerlen, Netherlands.
W L W VAN HemertZuyderland Medical Centre, Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Heerlen, Netherlands.
M HeijmansZuyderland Medical Centre, Zuyderland Academy Heerlen, Netherlands.
R A DE BieResearch School CAPHRI.
L W VAN RhijnResearch School CAPHRI.
P C P H WillemsResearch School CAPHRI.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA validated classification remains the key to an appropriate treatment algorithm of traumatic thoracolumbar fractures. Considering the development of many classifications, it is remarkable that consensus about treatment is still lacking. We conducted a systematic review to investigate which classification can be used best for treatment decision making in thoracolumbar fractures.

methodsA comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane using the following search terms: classification (mesh), spinal fractures (mesh), and corresponding synonyms. All hits were viewed by 2 independent researchers. Papers were included if analyzing the reliability (kappa values) and clinical usefulness (specificity or sensitivity of an algorithm) of currently most used classifications (Magerl/AO, thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score [TLICS] or thoracolumbar injury severity score, and the new AO spine).

resultsTwenty articles are included. The presented kappa values indicate moderate to substantial agreement for all 3 classifications. Regarding the clinical usefulness, > 90% agreement between actual treatment and classification recommendation is reported for most fractures. However, it appears that over 50% of the patients with a stable burst fracture (TLICS 2, AO-A3/A4) in daily practice are operated, so in these cases treatment decision is not primarily based on classification.

conclusionAO, TLICS, and new AO spine classifications have acceptable accuracy (kappa > 0.4), but are limited in clinical usefulness since the treatment recommendation is not always implemented in clinical practice. Differences in treatment decision making arise from several causes, such as surgeon and patient preferences and prognostic factors that are not included in classifications yet. The recently validated thoracolumbar AO spine injury score seems promising for use in clinical practice, because of inclusion of patient-specific modifiers. Future research should prove its definite value in treatment decision making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Without the appropriate treatment, the impact of traumatic thoracolumbar fractures can be devastating. Therefore it is important to achieve consensus in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures.

Indexed as

AO spineclassificationclinical usefulnessfracturesreliabilitythoracolumbar spineTLICS

Identifiers

PMID33560256
PMCPMC7872412

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.