ArticleTranslational cancer research2022
Comparing the efficacy and safety of cement-augmented fenestrated pedicle screws and conventional pedicle screw in surgery for spinal metastases: a retrospective comparative cohort study.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative analysis of the safety and efficacy of fenestrated pedicle screw with cement and conventional pedicle screw with cement in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures: A meta-analysis.Chinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi · 2025Pooled it
- Risk Factors for Cement Leakage into Segmental Veins during Posterior Spinal Fusion Using Fenestrated Pedicle Screws.Spine surgery and related research · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Robotic Approach to Treating Cement Leakage Into the Psoas: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- Cementation strategies in the osteoporotic, metastatic, or ankylosing thoracolumbar spine in older adults: Cement-associated complications and implant failure.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Safety of a Triple-Modality Approach Combining Decompression, Vertebral Augmentation, and Radiotherapy for Thoracolumbar Metastatic Tumors With Neurological Involvement.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The incidence of cancer patients with bone metastasis is increasing annually. With the advancement of medical treatment for malignant tumors, the survival time of patients with spinal metastases is gradually being prolonged, and adjacent segment vertebral metastases often occur after conventional pedicle screw (CPS) surgery, leading to spinal instability, pain and nerve function injury again, with repeated symptoms. Combined pedicle screw fixation can maintain or reconstruct the spinal stability. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of cement-augmented fenestrated pedicle screws in the posterior approach for spinal metastases by comparing with CPS. Methods: From January 2017 to August 2019, 52 patients with spinal metastases who underwent separation surgery and internal fixation via posterior approach were retrospectively enrolled. Cases were divided into the cement-augmented pedicle screw (CAPS) group (28 cases) and the CPS group (24 cases). The baseline data [age, gender, surgical sites, surgical segment, Tomita classification, Tomita score, Tokuhashi score, spinal instability neoplastic score (SINS)], surgical information, and local progression-free survival (PFS) time were compared between the two groups. Every patient was followed-up every 3 months with imaging examination. The visual analog scale (VAS) score and Frankel grade of the two groups were recorded before and 3 months after the operation were used to evaluate the efficacy. The operation time, the amount of intraoperative blood loss, the amount of bone cement injected in the pedicle screw group, and the complications of the surgery were recorded to evaluate the safety of CAPS. Results: The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two group. Compared with the CPS group, the CAPS group showed significantly longer operation time (163±20 Conclusions: CAPS could be a safe and effective choice in surgery for spinal metastases with the posterior approach.
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.