ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2023
Comparison of Long-Term Clinical and Radiographical Outcomes between the Anterior and Combined Anterior and Posterior Approaches for Treating Lumbosacral Tuberculosis.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveBoth anterior and combined anterior and posterior approaches have been used to treat lumbosacral tuberculosis. However, long-term follow-up studies of each approach have not been conducted. We aimed to compare the long-term clinical and radiographical outcomes between the two approaches.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we included 49 patients with a minimum 6-year follow-up between January 2008 and March 2012. Twenty-four patients underwent the anterior approach (anterior group), and 25 underwent the combined anterior and posterior approach (anterior-posterior group). Student's t test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Pearson's chi-square test were used to compare the two groups regarding clinical data, such as visual analogue scale scores, Oswestry disability index scores and neurological status, and radiographical data, such as lumbosacral angle, lumbar lordosis, and L5-S1 height. Furthermore, operative time, length of stay, and intraoperative and postoperative blood loss (IBL, PBL) were recorded.
resultsBoth groups had satisfactory clinical and radiographical outcomes until the final follow-up. All patients achieved bony fusion, and no group differences were found in any of the clinical indices. Both groups corrected and maintained the lumbosacral angle, lumbar lordosis, and L5-S1 height. However, the operative time, length of stay, maximum Hb drop, IBL, and PBL of the anterior group (140.63 ± 24.73 min, 12.58 ± 2.45 days, 28.33 ± 9.70 g/L, 257.08 ± 110.47 ml, and 430.60 ± 158.27 ml, respectively) were significantly lower than those of the anterior-posterior group (423.60 ± 82.81 min, P < 0.001; 21.32 ± 3.40 days, P < 0.001; 38.48 ± 8.03 g/L, P < 0.001; 571.60 ± 111.04 ml, P < 0.001; and 907.01 ± 231.99 ml, P < 0.001).
conclusionThis retrospective study demonstrated long-term efficacy of the anterior approach with a single screw fixation, which was as effective as that of the combined anterior and posterior approach, with the advantage of less trauma.
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.