ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2022
Open vs Percutaneous Pedicle Instrumentation for Kyphosis Correction in Traumatic Thoracic and Thoracolumbar Spine Injuries.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of functional outcomes and return to work in thoracolumbar junction fractures (T11-L2) following posterior spinal fusion: A prospective observational study.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 · 2026Observational
- Surgical management of posttraumatic thoracolumbar Kyphosis: A review.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPercutaneous pedicle instrumentation (PPI) has been used for the treatment of thoracic and thoracolumbar (TL) trauma. However, the ability of PPI to correct significant post-traumatic kyphosis requires further investigation. The objective of this study is to compare the amount of kyphosis correction achieved by PPI vs the traditional open posterior approach in patients presenting with significant kyphotic deformity following traumatic thoracic and TL spine injuries.
methodsFollowing Institutional Review Board approval, patients who underwent surgery for thoracic (T1-T9) or TL (T10-L2) fractures with at least 15° of focal kyphosis in a 5-year period were included in this study. Patients were separated into 2 cohorts based on surgical technique: traditional open posterior approach and minimally invasive PPI. Kyphosis correction was measured using Cobb angle 1 vertebrae above and 1 below the level of injury on sagittal preoperative computed tomography image, immediate and follow-up postoperative upright lateral radiographs. Initial degree of correction and loss of correction at the final follow-up were compared.
resultsOf 91 patients included, 65 (71%) underwent open surgery and 26 (29%) underwent PPI. Open patients had 11° (95% CI, 9°-13°) of immediate correction compared with 11° (95% CI, 6°-15°) for PPI (
conclusionsPPI techniques provide equivalent postoperative angular correction and maintenance of correction compared with open surgery in thoracic and TL trauma patients. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides evidence for spine surgeons to utilize either technique for treating significant traumatic kyphotic deformity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic 3.
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.