ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2023
Complications and radiographic changes after implantation of interspinous process devices: average eight-year follow-up.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Five-year outcomes from a multi-center prospective randomized controlled trial of minimally invasive interspinous fixation versus open direct decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.Interventional pain medicine · 2026Article
- Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of interlaminar coflex dynamic stabilization versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis: a comparative study with minimum 15-year follow-up.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Efficacy and Safety of the Use of Interspinous Spacers in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Mapping Gap and Scoping Review.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2026Article
- Demonstrating the feasibility of facet arthroplasty using the Total Posterior Spine System (TOPS) in the ambulatory surgery center (the TOPS outpatient experience).Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- The renewed role of interspinous devices: the InSpan system-a narrative review on surgical indications.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Review
- Chiropractic management of a Veteran with persistent spinal pain syndrome-2 status-post L3-L5 laminectomy and Coflex interlaminar stabilization: a case report.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2025Article
- Comparison of clinical efficacy and radiological findings of interspinous dynamic stabilization system versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease with a Novel Interlaminar Screw Elastic Spacer Technique: A Finite Element Analysis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to evaluate complications, clinical outcomes, and radiographic results following Coflex implantation.
methodsWe retrospectively studied 66 patients who had decompressive surgery combined with Coflex implantation to treat lumbar spinal stenosis. All imaging data were collected and examined for imaging changes. Clinical outcomes, included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back and leg visual analog scale (VAS) scores, were evaluated before surgery, six months after surgery and at the last follow-up. The number of complications occurring after five years of follow-up was counted. All reoperation cases were meticulously recorded.
results66 patients were followed up for 5-14 years. The VAS and ODI scores were significantly improved compared with baseline. Heterotopic Ossification (HO) was detectable in 59 (89.4%). 26 (39.4%) patients had osteolysis at the contact site of Coflex with the spinous process. Coflex loosening was detected in 39 (60%) patients. Spinous process anastomosis was found in 34 (51.5%) patients. There was a statistically significant difference in the VAS score of back pain between patients with and without spinous process anastomosis. Nine cases of lumbar spinal restenosis were observed, and prosthesis fracture was observed in one case.
conclusionOur study identified various imaging changes after Coflex implantation, and majority of them did not affect clinical outcomes. The majority of patients had HO, but osteolysis and Coflex loosening were relatively rare. The VAS score for back pain of these patients was higher if they have spinous process anastomosis. After five-year follow-up, we found lumbar spinal restenosis and prosthesis fracture cases.
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.