ArticleFrontiers in surgery2023
Clinical and radiological analysis of the effects of three different lumbar transpedicular dynamic stabilization system on disc degeneration and regeneration.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic vs. Rigid: Transforming the Treatment Landscape for Multisegmental Lumbar Degeneration.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- A Comprehensive Analysis of Vertebroplasty and Kyphoplasty for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures and Postoperative Sagittal Balance.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Comparison of Hybrid Dynamic Stabilization with TLIF Versus Dynamic Stabilization Alone in Degenerative Lumbar Instability.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Dynamic stabilization for unilateral spinal pathologies: clinical efficacy and safety outcomes.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Comparative Biomechanical Stability of the Fixation of Different Miniplates in Restorative Laminoplasty after Laminectomy: A Finite Element Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to assess the clinical outcomes of three transpedicular dynamic systems in treating degenerative disc disease and evaluate their impact on both clinical and radiological aspects of the operated and adjacent segments. Materials and methods: A total of 111 patients who underwent posterior transpedicular short-segment dynamic system procedures for treatment of degenerative disc disease were included. The patients were categorized into three groups, namely, Group 1 (Dynesys system, Results: Postoperatively, a statistically significant difference was observed in visual analog scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores ( Conclusion: In patients without advanced degeneration, all three dynamic systems demonstrated the ability to prevent degeneration in the adjacent and operated segments while promoting regeneration in the operated segment. Beyond inhibiting abnormal movement in painful segments, maintaining physiological motion and providing axial distraction in the operated segment emerged as key mechanisms supporting regeneration.
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.