Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35141657›Full record

ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2021

Posterior spinal instrumentation and decompression with or without cross-link?

Marco D Burkhard, Frédéric Cornaz, José Miguel Spirig, Florian Wanivenhaus, Rafael Loucas, Marie-Rosa Fasser, Jonas Widmer, Mazda Farshad

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in North American Spine Society journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Time to consider fracture nonunion an orphan disease? An update into pathophysiology, epidemiology and therapeutic solutions.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Residual motion of cortical versus pedicle screw constructs after decompression, interbody fusion and cross-link augmentation.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 · 2023
    Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marco D BurkhardDepartment of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Frédéric CornazDepartment of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
José Miguel SpirigUniversity Spine Center Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Florian WanivenhausUniversity Spine Center Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Rafael LoucasDepartment of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Marie-Rosa FasserInstitute for Biomechanics, Balgrist Campus, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Jonas WidmerInstitute for Biomechanics, Balgrist Campus, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Mazda FarshadDepartment of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPosterior lumbar instrumentation requires sufficient primary stiffness to ensure bony fusion and to avoid pseudarthrosis, screw loosening, or implant failure. To enhance primary construct stiffness, transverse cross-link (CL) connectors attached to the vertical rods can be used. Their effect on the stability of a spinal instrumentation with simultaneous decompression is yet not clear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of CL augmentation on single-level lumbar instrumentation stiffness after gradual decompression procedures.

methodsSeventeen vertebral segments (6 L1/2, 6 L3/4, 5 L5/S1) of 12 fresh-frozen human cadavers were instrumented with a transpedicular screw-rod construct following the traditional pedicle screw trajectory. Range of motion (ROM) of the segments was sequentially recorded before and after four procedures: (A) instrumented before decompression, (B) instrumented after unilateral laminotomy, (C) instrumented after midline bilateral laminotomy, and (D) instrumented after unilateral facetectomy (with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion [TLIF]). Each test was performed with and without CL augmentation. The motion between the cranial and caudal vertebrae was evaluated in all six major loading directions: flexion/extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), lateral shear (LS), anterior shear (AS), axial rotation (AR), and axial compression/distraction (AC).

resultsROM was significantly reduced with CL augmentation in AR by Δ0.03-0.18° (7-12%) with a significantly higher ROM reduction after more extensive decompression. Furthermore, slight reductions in FE and LB were observed; these reached statistical significance for FE after facetectomy and TLIF insertion only (Δ0.15; 3%). The instrumentation levels did not reveal any subgroup differences.

conclusionCL augmentation reduces AR-ROM by 7-12% in single-level instrumentation of the lumbar spine, with the effect increasing along with the extensiveness of the decompression technique. In light of the discrete absolute changes, CL augmentation may be warranted for highly unstable vertebral segments rather than for standard single-level posterior spinal fusion and decompression.

Indexed as

BiomechanicalCross-connectorCross-linkInstrumentationlumbarSegmental stabilitySpine

Identifiers

PMID35141657
PMCPMC8820010
OpenAlexW3211884081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.