ArticleActa neurochirurgica2024
Super-elderly, spinal surgery, evaluating the risks and benefits: a retrospective single-centre cohort study.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and External Validation of an Explainable Machine-Learning Model for Predicting Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Older Adults Undergoing Degenerative Spine Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Outcomes of adult spinal deformity surgery in octogenarians - How old is too old?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 · 2026Article
- A trajectory study of postoperative frailty and cognitive function in elderly spinal surgery patients: a cohort study in China.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
- A Retrospective Comparative Analysis of Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections and Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy for Managing Lumbar Radiculopathy in Super Elderly Patients.Clinical interventions in aging · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAn increasingly ageing population presents emerging healthcare challenges. Adequate clinical evaluation and understanding of outcome-predicting factors are integral to delivering safe spinal surgery to super-elderly patients.
aimTo evaluate spine surgery outcomes in patients aged 80 or above.
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated patients 80 years and above who underwent elective or emergency spinal surgery between 2017 and 2022. The Eurospine Surgery Classification (ESC) was used to classify operations into Large, Medium, and Small. We calculated and compared Clinical Frailty Scores (CFS) pre- and post-operatively.
resultsTwo hundred forty-five patients met the inclusion criteria. Most were male (n = 145). The age range was 80 to 99 (mean 83.3). Most operations were elective (n = 151, 62%). In our cohort, 211, 22, 10,2 and 1 patients had degenerative, trauma, tumour, infective and vascular pathologies, respectively. According to the Eurospine classification, 201 (82.0%) had Minor spine surgery (63 emergently and 138 electively), 38 had Medium surgery (15.5% - 30 emergently and 8 electively), and 6 had Large surgery (2.4% - 1 emergently and 5 electively). 163 (66.5%) were discharged or under follow-up. There were 11 in-patient mortalities (4.5%). Outpatient mortality was 51 (20.8%), with the median time from surgery to death being 504.5 days, all the outpatient mortalities were neither non-spinal pathology nor spinal surgical related. CFS improved across the cohort, from 5 pre-operatively to 4 post-operatively (p < 0.001).
conclusionSpine surgery in those over the 80s can be performed safely and improve their quality of life, as demonstrated by improvements in the CFS. Good patient selection and adequate pre-operative workup is essential, although it may not be possible in emergencies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38833175What 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.