Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38196735›Full record

ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2023

Patient-specific spinal rods in adult spinal deformity surgery reduce proximal junctional failure: a review of patient outcomes and surgical technique in a prospective observational cohort.

Charlie R Faulks, Dean T Biddau, Nigel R Munday, Dean P McKenzie, Gregory M Malham

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Surgical planning for spinal deformity correction: the contribution of patient-specific rods.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 · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Personalized Approaches to Spine Surgery.International journal of spine surgery · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Charlie R FaulksNeuroscience Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Dean T BiddauNeuroscience Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Nigel R MundayNeuroscience Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Dean P McKenzieResearch Development & Governance, Epworth HealthCare, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Gregory M MalhamNeuroscience Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Epworth Hospital · AUSwinburne University of Technology · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Spinal rods used for adult spinal deformity (ASD) correction are usually manufactured straight and bent manually during surgery. Pre-bent patient-specific spinal rods (PSSR) developed with software provide the surgeon with an intraoperative deformity correction consistent with the surgical plan. Our aim was to report clinical and radiological outcomes using PSSR. We investigated rates of junctional complications both proximally [kyphosis (PJK) and failure (PJF)] and distally [failure (DJF)]. Methods: Prospective case series of 20 consecutive patients who underwent ≥4 level ASD surgery with PSSR at a single institution between January 2019 and December 2022. Preoperative, 6-week, 6-month, 12-month, 24-month, and final follow-ups assessed patient satisfaction (Ottawa decision regret questionnaire) and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) [visual analogue scale (VAS; Back/Leg), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12)]. Sagittal spinopelvic parameters [sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic tilt (PT), and pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL)] measured by serial EOS scans were performed preoperatively then compared to planned correction and postoperative measures. Interoperative cages (narrow/wide) were placed for interbody support. PJK risk score assessed likelihood of developing kyphosis. Serial computed tomography (CT) imaging assessed complication (fusion/subsidence). Results: The mean age of the patients (75% female) was 71.9±6.9 years, and the mean follow-up was 25.2±8.6 [7-40] months. Preoperative mean PROMs showed statistically significant overall improvement (P<0.001) postoperatively to final follow-up. Four patients without wide footprint cages at L4/5 or L5/S1, suffered DJF and reported regret undergoing surgery. Statistically significant difference (P<0.001) between preoperative and surgical plan in SVA and PI-LL but not in PT (P=0.058). No statistically significant difference in surgical plan versus the postoperative SVA, PI-LL, and PT (due to difficulty achieving the surgical plan, and also to maintaining the correction). One patient suffered PJF. There was a mean proximal kyphotic angle (PKA) of 17.8±13.0 degrees and PJK risk score of 3.7±1.0 with 40% who experienced PJK. No rod breakages were observed. Conclusions: In this series, PSSR improved PROMs and treated ASD. Sagittal parameters planned preoperatively correlated with postoperative correction. PJF was reduced, compared to the literature (35%), but PJK was observed over time. DJF occurred and was related to the absence of interbody cages at the lumbosacral junction and decisional regret.

Indexed as

adult spinal deformity (ASD)junctional complicationspatient reported outcomesPatient-specific rodssagittal parameters

Identifiers

PMID38196735
PMCPMC10772658
OpenAlexW4390083593

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.