ArticleJournal of pain research2021
Multicenter Retrospective Review of Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interspinous Fusion Device.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- 24-Month Outcomes of Indirect Decompression Using a Minimally Invasive Interspinous Fixation Device versus Standard Open Direct Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Prospective Comparison.Journal of pain research · 2024Trial
- Early Functional Outcomes in Low Back Pain Subjects with a Novel Interspinous Fusion Device: REFINE Study 6-Month Results.Journal of pain research · 2023Trial
- Efficacy and Safety of the Use of Interspinous Spacers in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Mapping Gap and Scoping Review.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2026Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Interspinous Fixation Device via Lateral Transverse Approach in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Single Center, Retrospective, Observational Study.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- Advancing the design of interspinous fixation devices for improved biomechanical performance: dualJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2024Article
- Biomechanical characteristics of a novel interspinous distraction fusion device in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- A novel minimally invasive technique of inter-spinal distraction fusion surgery for single-level lumbar spinal stenosis in octogenarians: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Article
- The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain.Journal of pain research · 2022Review
- Knowledge Dissemination in Pain Medicine: Searching for Signal Within the Noise.Journal of pain research · 2022Article
- Best Practices for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Treatment 2.0 (MIST): Consensus Guidance from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN).Journal of pain research · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSeveral treatment options exist for those with spinal stenosis, as well as degenerative changes. This series evaluates the use of an interspinous fixation (ISF) device as performed by interventional pain physicians.
methodsThis is a retrospective analysis identifying 32 patients with the diagnosis of lumbar degenerative disc disease with secondary diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis being treated with ISF with Aurora Spine Zip Interspinous Spacer. Serious adverse events, specifically nerve injury, hematoma, infection, and death, were analyzed quantitatively for reported complications within 90 days from the procedure. In addition, VAS was analyzed for patient reported outcomes.
resultsAdverse event rate was 0% with no incidences of reoperation, or device removal. Estimated blood loss was recorded as less than 50 cc for all patients. The preoperative pain assessment demonstrated an average pain score of 8.1 and a postoperative pain score of 2.65 equating to a percentage pain reduction of 67%.
conclusionThis case series demonstrates the success and safety of ISF being performed by interventional pain physicians in an outpatient setting. It is a valuable tool in the treatment of moderate to severe lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative disc disease that has decreased morbidity and significant efficacy.
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.