ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2024
A retrospective cohort analysis of alignment parameters for spinal tumor patients with instrumentation at the cervicothoracic junction.
Article 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Previous research on spinal alignment and postoperative outcomes after cervical and upper thoracic fixation has suggested that clinical and patient-reported outcomes are improved when certain anatomical parameters are maintained. These parameters include the cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA), C2 and T1 slopes, and cervical lordosis (CL). For patients with primary and metastatic tumors involving the subaxial cervical and/or upper thoracic spine, there is minimal guidance on how to apply these parameters. Surgeons must make critical decisions when designing the optimal construct, considering patient life expectancy, bone quality, oncology goals and deformity. This study aims to evaluate the impact of cervical spine alignment parameters on postoperative hardware failure in spine tumor patients and highlight instances of complications in patients with instrumentation crossing the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ). Methods: A retrospective review of a single institutional spine tumor database identified seventeen patients who underwent spinal fusion crossing the CTJ from 2015 to 2023. All patients had postoperative neutral standing radiographs with measurable cSVA, C2 and T1 slopes, and/or CL. The primary endpoint was instrumentation failure, defined as hardware pull out or breakage, and secondary endpoints included other complications including wound infection and spinal fluid leak. Results: The number of instrumented levels ranged from 3 to 15 segments with a mean of 7.47. Surgical approaches included anterior ( Conclusions: Although there was wide variability in alignment parameters in this cohort, there were no instances of hardware failure with crossing the CTJ at a mean follow-up of 41 months. The overall complication rate was high at 24%. Despite common concerns about the impact of exaggerated slope and SVA on instrumentation failure these results suggest that cervical and upper thoracic tumor patients may still have a satisfactory result following CTJ fixation, even with unfavorable alignment parameters. Larger prospective studies are needed.
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.