Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38943143›Full record

SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024

Comparative effectiveness of cortical bone trajectory screws and pedicle screws in the treatment of adjacent segment degeneration after lumbar fusion surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Qisong Shang, Haopeng Luan, Cong Peng, Xinghua Song

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Robotic-assisted fixation with cortical bone trajectory versus conventional pedicle trajectory for short-segment lumbar decompression and fusion surgery: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study.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
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.

Qisong Shang *Department of Spine Surgery, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, 830002, China.
Haopeng Luan *Department of Spine Surgery, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, 830002, China.
Cong Peng *Department of Spine Surgery, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, 830002, China.
Xinghua SongDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, 830002, China. songxinghua19@163.com.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 82172454
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the efficacy and safety of cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw and pedicle screw (PS) internal fixation in the treatment of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) after lumbar fusion.

methodsThis study was registered on International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (ID: CRD42023484937). We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wan Fang Database, and Wei Pu Database by computer to collect controlled clinical studies on the efficacy and safety of cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw and pedicle screw (PS) internal fixation in the treatment of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) after lumbar fusion from database establishment to November 2023. Two researchers screened the literature, extracted data and evaluated the risk of bias of the included studies, recorded the authors, and sample size, and extracted the intraoperative blood loss, operation time, Oswestry disability index (ODI), Visual analogue scale (VAS), disc height (DH), hospital length stay and complications in each study. Meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.4 software provided by Cochrane Library.

resultsA total of 6 cohort studies (CS) and 1 randomized controlled study with a total of 420 patients were included in this study, including 188 patients in the CBT group and 232 patients in the PS group. The CBT group had lower intraoperative blood loss than the PS group [mean difference (MD) = -129.38, 95% CI (-177.22, -81.55), P < 0.00001] and operation time was shorter than that of the PS group [MD = -1.42, 95% CI (-2.63, -0.20), P = 0.02]. Early postoperative back and leg pain improved more significantly in the CBT group [MD = -0.77, 95% CI (-1.35, -0.19), P = 0.01; MD = -0.24, 95% CI (-0.37, -0.10), P = 0.0005].

conclusionCompared with PS, CBT for adjacent segment degeneration after lumbar fusion has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, shorter operation time, and less back and leg pain in the early postoperative period.

Indexed as

Cortical BoneLumbar VertebraePedicle ScrewsSpinal FusionBlood Loss, SurgicalBone ScrewsFemaleHumansIntervertebral Disc DegenerationMaleOperative TimeTreatment OutcomeAdjacent segment degenerationCortical bone trajectoryLumbar fusionMeta-analysisPedicle screw

Identifiers

PMID38943143
PMCPMC11212258

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.