ArticleGlobal spine journal2023
The Utility of 'Minimal Access and Separation Surgery' in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease.
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 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of patients with cervical spine metastasis treated with different surgical approaches-decision based on location.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Carbon-fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone instrumentation in metastatic spine tumor surgery: technical considerations and potential pitfalls to avoid.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- Outcomes and Complications of Surgery for Symptomatic Spinal Metastases; a Comparison Between Patients Aged ≥ 70 and <70.Global spine journal · 2025Article
- When Would Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery Not Be Preferable for Metastatic Spine Disease?International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Nonmetallic Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polyetheretherketone Implants Vs Titanium Implants: Analysis of Clinical Outcomes and Influence on Postoperative Radiotherapy Planning in Metastatic Spine Tumor Surgery.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Spinal Metastases of the Vertebrae: Three Main Categories of Pain.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Article
- The Role and Clinical Outcomes of Endoscopic Spine Surgery of Treating Spinal Metastases; Outcomes of 29 Cases From 8 Countries.Neurospine · 2023Article
- Fully Endoscopic Spine Separation Surgery in Metastatic Disease-Case Series, Technical Notes, and Preliminary Findings.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Trends in surgical management of spinal metastases in a Singaporean tertiary referral center: a 17-year retrospective review.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective cohort study.
objectivesTo compare outcomes of percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) to open posterior stabilization (OPS) in spinal instability patients and minimal access separation surgery (MASS) to open posterior stabilization and decompression (OPSD) in metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) patients.
methodsWe analysed patients who underwent surgery for thoracolumbar metastatic spine disease (MSD) from Jan 2011 to Oct 2017. Patients were divided into minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) and open spine surgery (OSS) groups. Spinal instability patients were treated with PPSF/OPS with pedicle screws. MSCC patients were treated with MASS/OPSD. Outcomes measured included intraoperative blood loss, operative time, duration of hospital stay and ASIA-score improvement. Time to initiate radiotherapy and perioperative surgical/non-surgical complications was recorded. Propensity scoring adjustment analysis was utilised to address heterogenicity of histological tumour subtypes.
resultsOf 200 eligible patients, 61 underwent MISS and 139 underwent OSS for MSD. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between MISS and OSS groups. In the MISS group, 28 (45.9%) patients were treated for spinal instability and 33 (54.1%) patients were treated for MSCC. In the OSS group, 15 (10.8%) patients were treated for spinal instability alone and 124 (89.2%) were treated for MSCC. Patients who underwent PPSF had significantly lower blood loss (95 mL vs 564 mL;
conclusionThis study demonstrates the benefits of PPSF and MASS over OPS and OPSD for the treatment of MSD with spinal instability and MSCC, respectively.
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.