Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38124504›Full record

ArticleAsian spine journal2024

Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: Is the Feasible Option of Minimally Invasive Surgery using Posterior Approach?

Hong Jin Kim, Lawrence G Lenke, Javier Pizones, René Castelein, Per D Trobisch, Mitsuru Yagi, Michael P Kelly, Dong-Gune Chang

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asian spine journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Thoracic Myelopathy Caused by Thoracic Degenerative Spondylolisthesis and Lumbar Scoliosis.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2025
    Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis in Siblings Treated by Surgical Deformity Correction.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Hong Jin KimDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital, College of Medicine, Inje University, Seoul, Korea.
Lawrence G LenkeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Daniel and Jane Och Spine Hospital, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Javier PizonesDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain.
René CasteleinDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Per D TrobischDepartment of Spine Surgery, Eifelklinik St. Brigida, Simmerath, Germany.
Mitsuru YagiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, International University of Health and Welfare, School of Medicine, Narita, Japan.
Michael P KellyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rady Children's Hospital, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA.
Dong-Gune ChangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital, College of Medicine, Inje University, Seoul, Korea.
Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital · KRColumbia University · USHospital Universitario La Paz · ESInternational University of Health and Welfare · JPUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of California San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of previous studies on minimally invasive scoliosis surgery (MISS) in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Some data on MISS in AIS compared with conventional open scoliosis surgery (COSS) are conflicting. A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library, including studies reporting outcomes for MISS in AIS. The meta-analysis compared the operative, radiological, and clinical outcomes and complications between MISS and COSS in patients with AIS. Of the 208 records identified, 15 nonrandomized studies with 1,369 patients (reviews and case reports are excluded) were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The mean scale was 6.1, and eight of the 15 included studies showed satisfactory quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. For operative outcomes, MISS had significant benefits in terms of estimated blood loss (standard mean difference [SMD], -1.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.94 to -0.91) and hospitalization days (SMD, -2.99; 95% CI, -4.45 to -1.53) compared with COSS. However, COSS showed significantly favorable outcomes for operative times (SMD, 1.71; 95% CI, 0.92-2.51). No significant differences were observed in radiological outcomes, including Cobb's angle of the main curve and thoracic kyphosis. For clinical outcomes, MISS showed significant benefits on the visual analog scale score (SMD, -0.91; 95% CI, -1.36 to -0.47). The overall complication rates of MISS were similar to those of COSS (SMD, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.61-1.52). MISS using the posterior approach provides equivalent radiological and clinical outcomes and complication rates compared with COSS. Considering the lower estimated blood loss, shorter hospitalization days, and longer operative times in MISS, COSS is still the mainstay of surgical treatment in AIS; however, MISS using the posterior approach is also one of the surgical options of choice in the case of moderate AIS.

Indexed as

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosisConventional open scoliosis surgeryMeta-analysisMinimally invasive scoliosis surgerySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38124504
PMCPMC11065506
OpenAlexW4390057626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.