ReviewNorth American Spine Society journal2024
Comparison of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between open, wiltse, and percutaneous approach to traumatic thoracolumbar spine fractures without neurological injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in North American Spine Society journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Wiltse paraspinal approach in lumbar surgery: A systematic review.Surgical neurology international · 2026Review
- No Weekend Effect in Elective Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Nationwide Analysis of 437,121 U.S. Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical efficacy and radiological outcomes of a novel screw placement technique for the treatment of traumatic thoracolumbar vertebral fractures under navigation guidance.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Traumatic thoracolumbar fracture fixation without neurological injury can be performed using the traditional open, mini-open Wiltse, and percutaneous approaches. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare perioperative outcomes between these approaches. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for all relevant observational comparative studies. Results: 5 randomized trials and 22 comparative cohort studies were included. Compared to the traditional open approach (n=959), the Wiltse approach (n=410) was associated with significantly lower operative time, intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL), and length of stay (LOS). There was no significant difference between the two in terms of postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) and Cobb angle. Compared to the percutaneous approach (n=980), the Wiltse approach was associated with shorter operative and fluoroscopy time, as well as significantly improved Cobb and vertebral body angles. The percutaneous approach was associated with improved vertebral body height. There was no significant difference between the two for blood loss, postoperative VAS, or LOS. Compared to the traditional open approach, the percutaneous approach was associated with shorter operative time, lower EBL, shorter LOS and better postoperative VAS and Oswestry Disability Index. There was no difference between the two in postoperative Cobb angle, vertebral angle, or vertebral body height. Overall study heterogeneity was high. Conclusions: Utilization of minimally invasive surgical approaches holds great promise for lowering patient morbidity and optimizing care. A prospective trial is needed to assess outcomes and guide surgical decision making.
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.