Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36684284›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022

Efficacy of a novel percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and vertebral reconstruction versus the traditional open pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of single-level thoracolumbar fracture without neurologic deficit.

Lining Rui, Fudong Li, Cao Chen, Yuan E, Yuchen Wang, Yanhong Yuan, Yunfeng Li, Jian Lu, Shengchang Huang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in surgery, 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lining RuiDepartment of Spinal Surgery, Wujin Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changzhou, China.
Fudong LiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Center, Shanghai Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Cao ChenDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Yuan EDepartment of Spinal Surgery, Wujin Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changzhou, China.
Yuchen WangDepartment of Sports Medicine, Wujin Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changzhou, China.
Yanhong YuanDepartment of Spinal Surgery, Wujin Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changzhou, China.
Yunfeng LiDepartment of Spinal Surgery, Wujin Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changzhou, China.
Jian LuDepartment of Spinal Surgery, Wujin Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changzhou, China.
Shengchang HuangDepartment of Spinal Surgery, Wujin Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changzhou, China.
Nanjing Medical University · CNShanghai Changzheng Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a novel percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and vertebral reconstruction (PPSR) vs. that of open pedicle screw fixation (OPSF) in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures. Methods: This retrospective study enrolled 153 patients who underwent PPSR and 176 patients who received OPSF. Periprocedural characteristics, radiographic parameters, and clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: The operation duration was 93.843 ± 20.611 in PPSR group and 109.432 ± 11.903 in OPSF group; blood loss was 131.118 ± 23.673 in PPSR group and 442.163 ± 149.701 in OPSF group, incision length was 7.280 ± 1.289 in PPSR group and 14.527 ± 2.893 in OPSF group, postoperative stay was 8.732 ± 1.864 in PPSR group and 15.102 ± 2.117 in OPSF group, and total hospitalization costs were 59027.196 ± 8687.447 in PPSR group and 73144.432 ± 11747.567 in OPSF group. These results indicated that these parameters were significantly lower in PPSR compared with those in OPSF group. No significant difference was observed in the incidence of complications between the two groups. The radiographic parameters including height of the anterior vertebra, Cobb angle, and vertebral wedge angle were better in PPSR group than in OPSF group. Recovery rate of AVH was 0.449 ± 0.079 in PPSR group and 0.279 ± 0.088 in OPSF group. Analysis of clinical results revealed that during postoperative period, the VAS and ODI scores in PPSR group were lower than those in OPSF group. Conclusions: Collectively, these results indicated that PPSR more effectively restored the height of anterior vertebra and alleviated local kyphosis compared with OPSF. Moreover, the VAS and ODI scores in PPSR group were better than those of OPSF group.

Indexed as

anterior vertebral heightopen pedicle screw fixationpercutaneous pedicle screw fixation and vertebral reconstructionthoracolumbar fracturevertebral reconstruction

Identifiers

PMID36684284
PMCPMC9852511
OpenAlexW4313647173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.