SynthesisSpine deformity2023
Wide anatomical variability of PI normative values within an asymptomatic population: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Spine deformity, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sacroiliac Joint Anatomical Variants and Their Association with Spinopelvic Alignment: A Whole-Spine CT Study.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Normatıve sagıttal spınopelvıc profıles: A systematıc revıew of the Roussouly classıfıcatıon across dıfferent ethnıc groups ın asymptomatıc adults.Spine deformity · 2026Review
- The Effect of the Thoracolumbar Junction on Spinopelvic Parameters in Lenke 1 Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis with Selective Fusion.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2025Article
- Emerging Technologies within Spine Surgery.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeStudies on sagittal alignment parameters have solely focused on patients with preexisting spinal deformity. Limited data in the literature have analyzed pelvic incidence (PI) values in an asymptomatic patient population. The purpose of this study was to: (1) systematically review the literature to analyze normative PI values in asymptomatic patients; and (2) provide a more definitive geometric measurement guide for determining surgical interventions.
methodsA systematic review of retrospective studies was performed by searching PubMed to identify studies that analyzed PI measurements in asymptomatic subjects. The following search phrases were used: (pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, sacral slope, sagittal alignment, radiograph, asymptomatic, normative values, and adults) using Boolean operators AND, OR and NOT. Patients with pathology involving the osseous pelvic anatomy (including fracture, infection, tumor, previous surgery, and lumbosacral fusion) that would prevent measurement of the selected parameters were not included. Pelvic incidence (PI) values were analyzed.
resultsA total of 29 studies met inclusion criteria, including 3629 asymptomatic subjects who underwent standing lateral radiographs (mean age, 41.1 years; range, 24-69 years) for the purposes of analyzing pelvic incidence values. Overall, the mean PI value was 50.0° (range, 24-69) which is consistent with reported values in the literature.
conclusionWide anatomical variability and broad clinical interpretation of PI normative values do little to guide surgical planning for successful outcomes. However, this systematic review has presented PI-stratified normative values in a large sample of asymptomatic subjects which can serve as a grounded geometric reference for spine surgeons when considering surgical intervention approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36735158What 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.