ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022
The efficacy and safety of anterior versus posterior approach for the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2022. 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Posterior Fixation and Fusion (PFF) versus Combined Anterior and Posterior Fixation and Fusion (CAPFF) for type B and C thoracolumbar spine injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Pooled it
- Modified Spinous Process-Splitting Approach for Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures With Neurological Deficits: Technical Description and Preliminary Clinical Outcomes.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Anterior versus posterior decompression for the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fracture- A single center prospective comparative study with short-term outcomes.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- The impact of fixed segment length on the surgical outcomes of single-segment lumbar burst fractures: shorter segments are more prone to the formation of local stable osteophytes: a retrospective observational study.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- Impact of traumatic intervertebral disc injury on loss of correction following pedicle screw fixation for thoracolumbar fractures.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Surgical Decision-Making in Thoracolumbar Fractures: A Systematic Review of Anterior and Posterior Approach.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2025Review
- Hybrid kyphoplasty with short-versus intermediate- and long-segment pedicle screw fixations for the management of thoracolumbar burst fractures.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- A Network Meta-Analysis on the Surgical Management of Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: Anterior, Posterior, and Combined.Spine surgery and related research · 2023Review
- The effectiveness of posterior Schanz screw system in the anatomical restoration of thoracolumbar vertebral burst fractures: A 10-year single-institution experience.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There has always been controversy about the choice of anterior approach or posterior approach for the surgical approach of thoracolumbar burst fractures (TBFs). The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of anterior and posterior approaches in the treatment of TBFs. Methods: Multiple databases including PubMed, Excerpt Medica Database (Embase), Cochrane Library, and Web of Science (WOS) were used to search for relevant studies, namely full-text articles comparing the anterior versus posterior approach for the treatment of TBFs, which based on population, intervention, control, outcome, and study (PICOS) framework. Review Manager 5.4 was used to assess the effects of the results among selected studies. The risk of bias of the trials was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa scale (NOS) and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Forest plots and funnel plots were also generated for the included articles. Results: Finally, 723 patients were included in 13 studies which satisfied the eligibility criteria, funnel plots and Egger's test showed that there was no significant bias in the publications. There were no differences in terms of length of stay [mean difference (MD): -1.31, (-5.31, 2.69); P=0.52], hospitalization expenses [standardized mean difference (SMD): 1.26, (-0.38, 2.89); P=0.13], and return to work between the anterior approach and posterior approach. However, the posterior approach had the advantages of better Cobb angle correction [MD: 2.06, (0.17, 3.94); P=0.03], shorter operation time [MD: 58.29, (35.39, 81.18); P<0.00001], and lower estimated blood loss [MD: 185.92, (131.76, 240.07); P<0.00001]. Discussion: The posterior approach appeared to be superior to the anterior approach in the treatment of TBFs. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials should be conducted to confirm the conclusions of this study and guide clinical decision-making.
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.