Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34565202›Full record

ArticleGlobal spine journal2023

International Variability in Spinal Metastasis Treatment: A Survey of the AO Spine Community.

Zach Pennington, Jose L Porras, Sheng-Fu Larry Lo, Daniel M Sciubba

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global spine journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A novel strategy of "Separation Surgery Combined with Vertebroplasty and Interstitial Implantation ofEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Regional variability and economic impact on surgical practices for metastatic spinal disease in Europe - a survey on spine surgeons.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 · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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.

Zach PenningtonDepartment of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8012-860X
Jose L PorrasDepartment of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8664-7646
Sheng-Fu Larry LoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7262-2544
Daniel M SciubbaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7604-434X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designInternational survey.

objectivesTo assess variability in the treatment practices for spinal metastases as a function of practice setting, surgical specialty, and fellowship training among an international group of spine surgeons.

methodsAn anonymous internet-based survey was disseminated to the AO Spine membership. The questionnaire contained items on practice settings, fellowship training, indications used for spinal metastasis surgery, surgical strategies, multidisciplinary team use, and postoperative follow-up priorities and practice.

results341 gave complete responses to the survey with 76.3% identifying spinal oncology as a practice focus and 95.6% treating spinal metastases. 80% use the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) to guide instrumentation decision-making and 60.7% recruit multidisciplinary teams for some or all cases. Priorities for postoperative follow-up are adjuvant radiotherapy (80.9%) and systemic therapy (74.8%). Most schedule first follow-up within 6 weeks of surgery (62.2%). Significant response heterogeneity was seen when stratifying by practice in an academic or university-affiliated center, practice in a cancer center, completion of a spine oncology fellowship, and self-identification as a tumor specialist. Respondents belonging to any of these categories were more likely to utilize SINS (

conclusionsThe largest variability in practice strategies is based upon practice setting, spine tumor specialization, and completion of a spine oncology fellowship. These respondents were more likely to use evidenced-based practices. However, the response variability indicates the need for consensus building, particularly for postoperative spine metastasis care pathways and multidisciplinary team use.

Indexed as

consensus buildingevidence-based medicinespine metastasisspine oncologyspine tumor

Identifiers

PMID34565202
PMCPMC10448098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.