ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Radiological Evaluation of Combined Anteroposterior Fusion with Vertebral Body Replacement Using a Minimally Invasive Lateral Approach for Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures: Verification of Optimal Surgical Procedure.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomaterials for vertebral body repair: interior augmentation and total replacement-a literature review of bone fusion outcomes in clinical studies.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Review
- Evaluating osteoporosis and bone quality in the aging spine: modern considerations for surgical management in the geriatric population.GeroScience · 2024Review
- [Osteoporotic vertebral fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Short-Term Risk Factors for Distal Junctional Kyphosis after Spinal Reconstruction Surgery in Patients with Osteoporotic Vertebrae.Asian spine journal · 2024Article
- Comparison of predictive performance for cage subsidence between CT-based Hounsfield units and MRI-based vertebral bone quality score following oblique lumbar interbody fusion.European radiology · 2023Article
- Risk Factors for Cage Subsidence in Minimally Invasive Lateral Corpectomy for Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures.Spine surgery and related research · 2023Article
- Osteoporotic Vertebral Body Fractures: New Trends in Differential Diagnosis, Bracing and Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The combined anteroposterior fusion with vertebral body replacement (VBR) using a wide footplate expandable cage with a minimally invasive lateral approach has been widely used for pseudoarthrosis after osteoporotic vertebral fractures. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the radiological results of combined anteroposterior surgery using VBR and to recommend the optimal procedure. Thirty-eight elderly patients were included in this study. The mean preoperative local kyphosis angle was 29.3°, and the mean correction loss angle was 6.3°. Cage subsidence was observed in ten patients (26.3%), and UIV or LIV fracture in twelve patients (31.6%). Patients with cage subsidence were compared to those without cage subsidence to determine the causal factors. The mean number of fixed vertebrae was 5.4 vertebrae with cage subsidence and 7.4 vertebrae without cage subsidence. In addition, to precisely clarify the optimal number of fixed vertebrae, those patients with two above-two below fixation were compared to those with less than two above-two below fixation, which revealed that the correction loss angle was significantly less in two above-two below fixation (
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.