ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2025
The impact of patient-specific spine rods on spinopelvic parameters after short segment degenerative lumbar fusions.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2025. 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.
- Accuracy of patient-specific rods in long segment multilevel fusions: a single-institution study.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Current Applications and Future Directions of Technologies Used in Adult Deformity Surgery for Personalized Alignment: A Narrative Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Utility of Enabling Technologies in Spinal Deformity Surgery: Optimizing Surgical Planning and Intraoperative Execution to Maximize Patient Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patient-specific spine rods (PSSRs) are custom-designed pre-operatively to align with individual spinopelvic parameters, aiming to optimize post-operative alignment. While effective in correcting adult spinal deformities, their utility in degenerative lumbar fusions remains relatively understudied. This study seeks to assess the outcomes of PSSR utilization in degenerative lumbar fusions by comparing them to a previously published cohort by Leveque Methods: Fifty patients who underwent primary lumbar fusion with PSSRs were included, excluding those with prior lumbar fusion or significant deformities. The study cohort was compared to a historical cohort using conventional rods. Radiographic outcomes were evaluated over a 2-year period, with follow-ups at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Pre-operative and post-operative measurements of pelvic incidence (PI) and lumbar lordosis (LL) were used to assess changes in changes in PI-LL alignment. Statistical analyses included one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests and one/two sample Results: Patients undergoing fusion PSSRs demonstrated a greater degree of change in pre-operative to post-operative PI-LL alignment compared to non-PSSR patients (-4.2° Conclusions: PSSRs demonstrate significant improvement in spinopelvic parameters, particularly in reducing PI-LL mismatch, in degenerative lumbar fusion surgery. This improvement suggests a potential for enhanced patient outcomes. Follow-up assessments indicate that these improvements are sustained over a 2-year period. However, our findings underscore the need for further research to validate these results on a larger scale and over the long term. Larger-scale studies are necessary to confirm long-term benefits and should aim to explore the specific mechanisms by which PSSRs contribute to improved outcomes and investigate optimal strategies for incorporating PSSRs into clinical practice.
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.