ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
The Evolution of Minimally Invasive Spine Tumor Resection and Stabilization: From K-Wires to Navigated One-Step Screws.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of minimally invasive surgery within a multidisciplinary approach for patients with metastatic spine disease over a decade: A systematic review.Neuro-oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Using Endoscopic Approaches in the Surgical Management of Spinal Metastatic Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Maximal feasible resection versus hybrid therapy in spinal metastases: an updated narrative review.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Review
- Comprehensive Insights into Metastasis-Associated Spinal Cord Compression: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognosis: A State-of-the-Art Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minimization of the surgical approaches to spinal extradural metastases resection and stabilization was advocated by the 2012 Oncological Guidelines for Spinal Metastases Management. Minimally invasive approaches to spine oncology surgery (MISS) are continually advancing. This paper will describe the evolution of minimally invasive surgical techniques for the resection of metastatic spinal lesions and stabilization in a single institute. A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent minimally invasive extradural spinal metastases resection during the years 2013-2019 by a single surgeon was performed. Medical records, imaging studies, operative reports, rates of screw misplacement, operative time and estimated blood loss were reviewed. Detailed description of the surgical technique is provided. Of 138 patients operated for extradural spinal tumors during the study years, 19 patients were treated in a minimally invasive approach and met the inclusion criteria for this study. The mortality rate was significantly improved over the years with accordance of improve selection criteria to better prognosis patients. The surgical technique has evolved over the study years from fluoroscopy to intraoperative 3D imaging and navigation guidance and from k-wire screw insertion technique to one-step screws. Minimally invasive spinal tumor surgery is an evolving technique. The adoption of assistive devices such as intraoperative 3D imaging and one-step screw insertion systems was safe and efficient. Oncologic patients may particularly benefit from the minimization of surgical decompression and fusion in light of the frailty of this population and the mitigated postoperative outcomes associated with MIS oncological procedures.
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.