Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35155547›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in surgery2021

Overview of Methods to Quantify Invasiveness of Surgical Approaches in Orthopedic Surgery-A Scoping Review.

Niels Buis, Hooman Esfandiari, Armando Hoch, Philipp Fürnstahl

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Niels BuisResearch in Orthopedic Computer Science Group (ROCS), Department of Orthopedics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Hooman EsfandiariResearch in Orthopedic Computer Science Group (ROCS), Department of Orthopedics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Armando HochResearch in Orthopedic Computer Science Group (ROCS), Department of Orthopedics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Philipp FürnstahlResearch in Orthopedic Computer Science Group (ROCS), Department of Orthopedics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a trend toward minimally invasive and more automated procedures in orthopedic surgery. An important aspect in the further development of these techniques is the quantitative assessment of the surgical approach. The aim of this scoping review is to deliver a structured overview on the currently used methods for quantitative analysis of a surgical approaches' invasiveness in orthopedic procedures. The compiled metrics presented in the herein study can serve as the basis for digitization of surgery and advanced computational methods that focus on optimizing surgical procedures.

methodsWe performed a blinded literature search in November 2020.

resultsThe final selection included 51 articles. In the included papers, approaches to 8 different anatomical structures were investigated, the majority of which examined procedures of the hip (57%) and the spine (29%). The different modalities to measure the invasiveness were categorized into three major groups "biological" (23 papers), "radiological" (25), "measured DISCUSSION: An ideal metric used to quantify the invasiveness of a surgical approach should be accurate, cost-effective, non-invasive, comprehensive and integratable into the clinical workflow. We find that the radiological methods best meet such criteria. However, radiological metrics can be more prone to confounders such as coexisting pathologies than

Indexed as

hipinvasivenessminimally invasiveorthopedic surgeryspinesurgical approach

Identifiers

PMID35155547
PMCPMC8825480
OpenAlexW4210715930

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.