Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33900969›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2021

Comparison of Adverse Outcomes Following Placement of Superion Interspinous Spacer Device Versus Laminectomy and Laminotomy.

Lindsay Welton, Brandi Krieg, Deepa Trivedi, Rahwa Netsanet, Nolan Wessell, Andriy Noshchenko, Vikas Patel

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2021. 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
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lindsay WeltonUniversity of Minnesota School of Medicine Department of Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Brandi KriegUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado.
Deepa TrivediUniversity of Colorado School of Public Health, Aurora, Colorado.
Rahwa NetsanetUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Division of Spine Surgery, Aurora, Colorado.
Nolan WessellUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Division of Spine Surgery, Aurora, Colorado.
Andriy NoshchenkoUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Division of Spine Surgery, Aurora, Colorado.
Vikas PatelUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Division of Spine Surgery, Aurora, Colorado.
University of Colorado Denver · USColorado School of Public Health · USUniversity of Minnesota · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent evidence suggests placement of the Superion interspinous spacer (SISS) device compared with laminectomy or laminotomy surgery offers an effective, less invasive treatment option for patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. Both SISS placement and laminectomy or laminotomy have risks of complications and a direct comparison of complications between the 2 procedures has not been previously studied. The purpose of this study is to compare the short-term complications of the SISS with laminectomy or laminotomy and highlight device-specific long-term outcomes with SISS.

methodsVia retrospective review, 189 patients who received lumbar level SISSs were compared with 378 matched controls who underwent primary lumbar spine laminectomy or laminotomy; data were collected from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Complications analyzed included rates of wound infection, pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, urinary tract infection, sepsis, septic shock, cardiac arrest, death, and reoperation within 30 days of index surgery. Differences between groups were analyzed using the χ

resultsNo differences in demographics or comorbidities existed between groups. There was no significant difference in rates of complications between groups. A total of 44.4% of patients in the SISS group experienced DSCs with 11.1% of patients experiencing DM, 21.1% experiencing an SPF, 20.1% requiring DE, and 24.3% requiring SSS. Having at least 1 DSC significantly increased odds of SSS, odds ratio >120,

conclusionRates of 30-day complications in the SISS group were not significantly different from patients undergoing laminectomy or laminotomy. Rates of 2-year DSC within SISS and cumulative risk associated with these complications should be considered further as they likely represent need for additional procedures for patients and substantial cost to the healthcare system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Having no differences in adverse events between laminectomies or laminotomies and SISS plus evidence of substantial device-specific long-term adverse outcomes and reoperation should be given consideration when deciding on surgical intervention of 1-2 level lumbar spinal stenosis.

Indexed as

interspinous spacerlaminectomylaminotomy

Identifiers

PMID33900969
PMCPMC7931702
OpenAlexW3132560403

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.