ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2024
Evaluating somatosensory evoked potentials in predicting treatment outcomes for thoracolumbar spinal compression fractures using closed reduction and over-extension techniques.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preoperative dermatomal somatosensory evoked potentials in risk prediction of early postoperative neurological deterioration after thoracic spine surgery: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the predictive value of somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) for the efficacy of closed reduction combined with over-extension reduction technique (PVP) in managing thoracolumbar spinal compression fractures.
methodsData were collected from 125 patients who underwent closed reduction with PVP and SEP monitoring from February 2021 to July 2023. We evaluated surgery success rates, incidence of bone cement leakage, and patient recovery outcomes including vertebral anterior height, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Cobb angle restoration. SEP results were analyzed to categorize patients into effective and ineffective treatment groups. Differences in SEP waveforms between these groups were examined, and ROC analysis was used to assess the predictive value of these differences. Multivariate logistic regression was employed to identify risk factors affecting treatment efficacy.
resultsPost-treatment assessments showed significant improvements in vertebral anterior height, ODI, and Cobb angle. SEP monitoring correlated well with intraoperative findings and physical examinations. During reduction, changes in SEP latency and amplitude were noted in 37 patients, with 7 patients meeting SEP amplitude alarm criteria, which normalized after adjustments. During PVP, 28 patients exhibited SEP amplitude fluctuations and 5 experienced a 30% reduction in amplitude following initial cement injection, with no significant latency changes. Treatment was deemed effective in 93 patients and ineffective in 32. SEP amplitudes during vertebral compression and PVP were significantly lower in the effective group (P<0.05). The AUC for predicting treatment efficacy was 0.819 and 0.859, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed low preoperative vertebral compression ratio, number of fractures, and abnormal SEP amplitudes as independent risk factors for treatment outcomes.
conclusionSEP monitoring provides an accurate reflection of spinal cord function during closed reduction with PVP, aiding in predicting treatment safety and efficacy. The use of SEP monitoring is thus recommended for clinical application in this context.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.