Trial reportEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
Comparative analysis of modified posterior mini-open surgery versus standard open posterior approach for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction: a prospective study.
Trial report in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Posterior spinal fusion with pedicle screw-based constructs in osteogenesis imperfecta: a systematic review of surgical and radiographic outcomes.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 · 2026Pooled it
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
purposeAdolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) surgery aims to achieve optimal deformity correction while minimizing complications. The standard open posterior approach (OS) is effective but associated with significant soft tissue disruption and prolonged recovery. The modified mini-open surgery (MS) technique offers a less invasive alternative, potentially reducing surgical morbidity while maintaining comparable correction.
methodsIn this prospective comparative study, 60 Lenke type 1 AIS patients with single thoracic curves were randomized to MS (n = 30) or OS (n = 30) groups. The MS technique utilized three midline incisions, a muscle-splitting approach, and selective arthrodesis at instrumented levels. Outcomes included deformity correction, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, postoperative pain (VAS), scar satisfaction, fusion rates, and complications at 2 years.
resultsBoth groups achieved comparable correction with no loss at 2 years (MS: 79.7% ± 8.0%; OS: 85.0% ± 7.4%; p > 0.05). The MS group had reduced intraoperative blood loss (383.3 ± 82.9 mL vs. 720.2 ± 74.3 mL; p = 0.019), shorter hospital stays (6.2 ± 0.3 vs. 7.4 ± 1.2 days; p = 0.044), and lower VAS scores at discharge (2.9 ± 1.8 vs. 3.9 ± 1.4; p = 0.02) and 2 years (1.5 ± 0.5 vs. 2.0 ± 0.7; p = 0.03). Scar satisfaction was higher in the MS group (4.5 ± 0.3 vs. 2.8 ± 0.6; p = 0.02). No pseudoarthrosis or complications occurred in either group.
conclusionThe MS approach offers comparable correction to OS with reduced morbidity and superior cosmesis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39912932What 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.