Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40235470›Full record

ArticleBrain & spine2025

Partial sacrectomy with en bloc tumor resection without instrumentation. What level is safe?

Jan Štulík, Michaela Rybárová, Pavel Hladík, Robert Lischke, Zdeněk Klézl, Radek Kaiser, Ondřej Naňka

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain & spine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Jan ŠtulíkCenter for Spinal Surgery, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic.
Michaela RybárováCenter for Spinal Surgery, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic.
Pavel HladíkIII. Department of Surgery, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic.
Robert Lischke1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Zdeněk KlézlCenter for Spinal Surgery, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic.
Radek KaiserDepartment of Spinal Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Ondřej NaňkaInstitute of Anatomy, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Research question: What level of resection is safe without reconstruction? Material and methods: Between 2014 and 2023 we performed a total of 29 sacral resections for various etiologies. Patients following reconstruction of the lumbosacral region by internal fixator (3) and patient after hemicorporectomy (1) were excluded from the study. The study group comprised 25 patients, 15 men and 10 women with a mean age of 45.1 years (range, 1.7-72.2 years). The most frequent indication for surgery was chordoma (8), followed by MPNST (4), yolk sac tumor (2) and undifferentiated sarcoma (2). Results: Stress fractures of the sacral stump occur in elderly patients with lower bone mineral density, or in younger patients with a higher bone mineral density who are more active when resuming their daily routine after the operation. Discussion and conclusion: Instrumentation is, in our view, primarily indicated in younger and more active patients, whereas in most cases, even with lower bone mineral density, non-instrumented procedure results in sufficient stability in all levels of partial resection.

Indexed as

Chordomaen bloc resectionen bloc sacrectomyPrimary sacral tumorSacral tumorSacrectomy

Identifiers

PMID40235470
PMCPMC11999580

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.