Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35410498›Full record

ReviewGlobal spine journal2023

Is Final Fusion Necessary for Growing-Rod Graduates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Kaustubh Ahuja, Syed Ifthekar, Samarth Mittal, Shiv K Bali, Gagandeep Yadav, Nikhil Goyal, P Venkata Sudhakar, Pankaj Kandwal

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Outcomes of retained growing rods without final fusion in early-onset scoliosis: What happened after graduation?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. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kaustubh AhujaDepartment of Spine Surgery, 75911Apollo Hospitals, New Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0003-1344-9889
Syed IfthekarDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, 442339All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, India.
Samarth MittalDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, 442339All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, India.ORCID 0000-0003-3528-0949
Shiv K BaliDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, 442339All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, India.
Gagandeep YadavDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, 442339All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, India.
Nikhil GoyalDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, 442339All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, India.ORCID 0000-0002-0387-4358
P Venkata SudhakarDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, 442339All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, India.ORCID 0000-0002-5976-561X
Pankaj KandwalDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, 442339All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, India.ORCID 0000-0002-8801-6909
All India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh · INAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Jodhpur · INApollo Hospitals · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designSystematic review and meta-analysis.

objectivesThe need for definitive fusion for growing rod graduates is a controversial topic in the management of Early-onset scoliosis (EOS) patients. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the available literature to evaluate the outcomes of growing rod graduates undergoing final fusion or observation with implants in-situ.

methodsAn extensive literature search was carried out aimed at identifying articles reporting outcomes in growing rod graduates. Apart from the study characteristics and demographic details, the extracted data included Cobb's correction, trunk height parameters, and revision rate. The extracted data was analyzed and forest plots were generated to draw comparisons between the observation and fusion groups.

resultsOf the 11 included studies, 6 were case-control and 5 were case series. The authors did not find any significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to the pre-index and final Cobb's correction, T1-T12 or T1-S1 height gain in either over-all, or sub-analysis with case-control studies. The meta-analysis showed a significantly higher revision rate in patients undergoing a definitive fusion procedure.

conclusionThe current analysis revealed comparable outcomes in terms of correction rate and gain in the trunk height but a lesser need of revisions in observation sub-group. The lack of good quality evidence and the need for prospective and randomized trials was also propounded by this review.

Indexed as

deformityfusionscoliosis

Identifiers

PMID35410498
PMCPMC9837500
OpenAlexW4223485162

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.