Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38618229›Full record

ArticleBrain & spine2024

Neurosurgery compared to orthopedic spine consultation: A single level I trauma center experience.

Shaina Sedighim, Brynn Sargent, Areg Grigorian, Christina Grabar, Anvesh R Macherla, Michael Oh, Yu-Po Lee, John Scolaro, Jefferson Chen, Jeffry Nahmias

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Brain & spine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shaina SedighimDivision of Trauma, Burns, And Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Brynn SargentDivision of Trauma, Burns, And Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Areg GrigorianDivision of Trauma, Burns, And Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Christina GrabarDivision of Trauma, Burns, And Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Anvesh R MacherlaDivision of Trauma, Burns, And Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Michael OhDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Yu-Po LeeDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
John ScolaroDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Jefferson ChenDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Jeffry NahmiasDivision of Trauma, Burns, And Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
University of California, Irvine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Both Orthopedic Surgery (OS) and Neurosurgery (NS) perform spine surgery in the setting of trauma. However, it is unknown whether outcomes differ between these specialties. This study compares management and outcomes for vertebral fractures between NS and OS, hypothesizing similar operation rate, length of stay (LOS), and readmission. Research question: Do outcomes differ between NS and OS in the management of vertebral fractures following trauma? Methods: A retrospective single-center study was conducted on adult patients with cervical, thoracic, lumbar, and sacral fractures treated at a single trauma center, where no standardized pathway exists across NS and OS. Patients were compared for injury profile, diagnostic imaging, and operative techniques as well as LOS, mortality, and complications. Results: A total of 630 vertebral fracture patients (OS:350 (55.6%); NS:280 (44.4%)) were included. NS utilized magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) more commonly (36.4% vs. 22.6%, p < 0.001). NS patients more often underwent operation (13.2% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.016) despite similar fracture number and severity (p > 0.05). Post-operative complications, LOS, and readmission rates were similar between cohorts (p > 0.05). Discussion and conclusion: Despite similar injury profiles, NS had higher rates of MRI usage and operative interventions in the context of traumatic spine fractures. Despite differences in management, major clinical outcomes were similar between NS and OS. However, we do call for further standardization of evaluation and treatment of patients based on established algorithms from such as the AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System (ATLICS).

Indexed as

NeurosurgeryOrthopedic surgerySpine surgeryTraumatic spine injuriesVertebral fractures

Identifiers

PMID38618229
PMCPMC11010962
OpenAlexW4393976360

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.