ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2023
Improvement of vertebral body fracture reduction utilizing a posterior reduction tool: a single-center experience.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Posterior thoracic discectomy and interbody fusion for the correction of severe hyperkyphotic deformity: technical note and case report.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive surgical techniques for the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2026Review
- The validity of posterior approach in thoracolumbar spine fracture surgery: A study of 104 cases with literature review.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
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
backgroundExtensive research regarding instabilities and prevention of kyphotic malalignment in the thoracolumbar spine exists. Keystones of this treatment are posterior instrumentation and anterior vertebral height restoration. Anterior column reduction via a single-stage procedure seems to be advantageous regarding complication, blood loss, and OR-time. Mechanical elevation of the anterior cortex of the vertebra may prevent the necessity of additional anterior stabilization or vertebral body replacement. The purpose of this study was to examine (1) if increased bony reduction in the anterior vertebral cortex could be achieved by utilization of an additional reduction tool, (2) if postoperative loss of vertebral height could be reduced, and (3) if anterior column reduction is related to clinical outcome.
methodsFrom one level I trauma center, 173 patients underwent posterior stabilization for fractures of the thoracolumbar region between 2015 and 2020. Reduction in the vertebral body was performed via intraoperative lordotic positioning or by utilization of an additional reduction tool (Nforce, Medtronic). The reduction tool was mounted onto the pedicle screws and removed after tightening of the locking screws. To assess bony reduction, the sagittal index (SI) and vertebral kyphosis angle (VKA) were measured on X-rays and CT images at different time points ((1) preoperative, (2) postoperative, (3) ≥ 3 months postoperative). Clinical outcome was assessed utilizing the Ostwestry Disability Index (ODI).
resultsBisegmental stabilization of AO/OTA type A3/A4 vertebral fractures was performed in 77 patients. Thereof, reduction was performed in 44 patients (females 34%) via intraoperative positioning alone (control group), whereas 33 patients (females 33%) underwent additional reduction utilizing a mechanical reduction tool (instrumentation group). Mean age was 41 ± 13 years in the instrumentation group (IG) and 52 ± 12 years in the control group (CG) (p < 0.001). No differences in terms of gender and comorbidities were found between the two groups. Preoperatively, the sagittal index (SI) was 0.69 in IG compared to 0.74 in CG (p = 0.039), resulting in a vertebral kyphosis angle (VKA) of 15.0° vs. 11.7° (p = 0.004). Intraoperatively, a significantly greater correction of the kyphotic deformity was achieved in the IG (p < 0.001), resulting in a compensation of the initially more severe kyphotic malalignment. The SI was corrected by 0.20-0.88 postoperatively, resulting in an improvement of the VKA by 8.7°-6.3°. In the CG, the SI could be corrected by 0.12-0.86 and the VKA by 5.1°-6.6°. The amount of correction was influenced by the initial deformity (p < 0.001). Postoperatively, both groups showed a loss of correction, resulting in a gain of 0.08 for the SI and 4.1° in IG and 0.03 and 2.0°, respectively. The best results were observed in younger patients with initially severe kyphotic deformity. Considering various influencing factors, clinical outcome determined by the ODI showed no significant differences between both groups.
conclusionUtilization of the investigated reduction tool during posterior stabilization of vertebral body fractures in a suitable collective of young patients with good bone quality and severe fracture deformity may lead to better reduction in the ventral column of the fractured vertebral body and angle correction. Therefore, additional anterior stabilization or vertebral body replacement may be prevented.
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.