Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37547617›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023

Development and validation of a risk prediction model for cage subsidence after instrumented posterior lumbar fusion based on machine learning: a retrospective observational cohort study.

Tuotuo Xiong, Ben Wang, Wanyuan Qin, Ling Yang, Yunsheng Ou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Endplate Hounsfield units outperform lumbar HU and VBQ in predicting cage subsidence after posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective cohort study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
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

5 authors.

Tuotuo XiongDepartment of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Ben WangDepartment of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Wanyuan QinDepartment of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Ling YangDepartment of Breast and Thyroid Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Yunsheng OuDepartment of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Interbody cage subsidence is a common complication after instrumented posterior lumbar fusion surgery, several previous studies have shown that cage subsidence is related to multiple factors. But the current research has not combined these factors to predict the subsidence, there is a lack of an individualized and comprehensive evaluation of the risk of cage subsidence following the surgery. So we attempt to identify potential risk factors and develop a risk prediction model that can predict the possibility of subsidence by providing a Cage Subsidence Score (CSS) after surgery, and evaluate whether machine learning-related techniques can effectively predict the subsidence. Methods: This study reviewed 59 patients who underwent posterior lumbar fusion in our hospital from 2014 to 2019. They were divided into a subsidence group and a non-subsidence group according to whether the interbody fusion cage subsidence occurred during follow-up. Data were collected on the patient, including age, sex, cage segment, number of fusion segments, preoperative space height, postoperative space height, preoperative L4 lordosis Angle, postoperative L4 lordosis Angle, preoperative L5 lordosis Angle, postoperative PT, postoperative SS, postoperative PI. The conventional statistical analysis method was used to find potential risk factors that can lead to subsidence, then the results were incorporated into stepwise regression and machine learning algorithms, respectively, to build a model that could predict the subsidence. Finally the diagnostic efficiency of prediction is verified. Results: Univariate analysis showed significant differences in pre-/postoperative intervertebral disc height, postoperative L4 segment lordosis, postoperative PT, and postoperative SS between the subsidence group and the non-subsidence group ( Conclusion: The machine learning algorithm has advantages in some indicators, and we have preliminarily established a CSS that can predict the risk of postoperative subsidence after lumbar fusion and confirmed the important application prospect of machine learning in solving practical clinical problems.

Indexed as

cage subsidencedegenerative diseasefusionprediction modelrisk factorsspine surgery

Identifiers

PMID37547617
PMCPMC10401589

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.