ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2023
Satellite Rod Fixation around Rod-fracture Area in Revision Surgery after Three-column Osteotomy for Severe Kyphoscoliosis.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence, Causes, and Timing of Unplanned Reoperations Following Three-Column Osteotomy for Pediatric and Adult Spinal Deformities: A Long-Term Single Center Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
- The Comparison of Posterior Intervertebral Release Combined with Posterior Column Osteotomy and Posterior Column Osteotomy Alone for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Rigid Scoliosis: A Prospective Controlled Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThree-column osteotomy (3CO) is considered valuable and increasingly utilized in the surgical treatment of severe spine deformity while associated with high implant-related complications and revision risks. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and clinical outcomes of satellite rod fixation used around the rod-fracture area in revision surgery due to rod fracture after 3CO.
methodsTwenty-five patients applying satellite rod fixation in revision surgery from August 2012 to May 2016 were retrospectively reviewed as the SR group. Patients undergoing revision surgery with traditional strategy after 3CO due to rod-fracture were selected as the TR group. Cobb angle, distance between C
resultsThere was no statistical difference in terms of age, gender, body mass index (BMI), fusion level at 1st surgery, and follow-up period between SR and TR group (all P > 0.05). The operation time (1.5 ± 0.7 h vs 3.2 ± 0.9 h, P < 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss (178 ± 51 mL vs 324 ± 96 mL, P < 0.001) were significantly higher in the TR group. Patients in both groups obtained obvious deformity correction after revision surgery. For patients in SR group, the coronal Cobb angle significantly improved from 27.9 ± 21.5° at pre-revision to 21.8 ± 16.6° at post-revision (P = 0.034). The C
conclusionSatellite rod fixation around rod-fracture area is indicated for patients in the requirement of revision surgeries due to rod fracture after 3CO. Compared with traditional revision strategies, revision surgery with satellite rods, if patients are selected adequately, is a simpler procedure with less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operating time.
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.