Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38644923›Full record

ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine

A radiological parametric comparison of low-grade lytic spondylolisthesis to degenerative spondylolisthesis - A retrospective approach to establish its dysplastic origin.

K R Pratap, Vikas Tandon, Aditya Sunder Goparaju, Aayush Aryal

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 95% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

K R PratapDepartment of Spine Services, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre, New Delhi, India.
Vikas TandonDepartment of Spine Services, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre, New Delhi, India.
Aditya Sunder GoparajuDepartment of Spine Services, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre, New Delhi, India.
Aayush AryalDepartment of Spine Services, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre, New Delhi, India.
Indian Spinal Injuries Centre · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to compare low-grade lytic spondylolisthesis (LS) and degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) radiologically. In addition, it seeks to identify underlying similarities between LS and DS. Methods: This study included patients with low-grade single-level spondylolisthesis at L4-L5 or L5-S1. They were categorized into LS and DS. Radiological features, including pedicle height, width, transverse, and sagittal angle, as well as anterior vertebral heights (AVH) and posterior vertebral heights (PVH), were measured using T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Results: The study involved 88 patients: 46 in the DS group and 42 in the LS group. In the LS group, the AVH was significantly higher than the posterior height at L4 and L5 (L4 PVH/AVH ratio 0.93 in LS vs. 0.96 in DS; L5 PVH/AVH ratio 0.84 in LS vs. 0.92 in DS), and pedicles were more medially oriented (L4: 19.62° in LS vs. 17.7° in DS; L5: 28.92° in LS vs. 26.47° in DS). In addition, at L5, the pedicle height (10.67 mm in LS vs. 11.48 mm in DS) and width (13.56 mm in LS vs. 14.37 mm in DS) were smaller compared to the DS group. Conclusions: Low-grade LS shows distinct radiological vertebral and pedicle anatomy compared to DS. Short and thin pedicles and wedge-shaped vertebrae in LS resemble DS, indicating its dysplastic origin.

Indexed as

Dysplasialumbar vertebrapediclespondylolisthesis

Identifiers

PMID38644923
PMCPMC11029101
OpenAlexW4392750831

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.