ArticleSpine deformity2025
A retrospective analysis of patients deemed ineligible for surgery in a multidisciplinary complex spine conference.
Article in Spine deformity, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAssess patient experiences and outcomes following a multidisciplinary conference recommendation against surgery, including the proportion who later pursued surgery elsewhere and their outcomes.
methodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of patients advised against surgery during our internal multidisciplinary ASD conference. A phone-based survey gathered on patient satisfaction, effectiveness of alternative treatments, rates of operations at outside hospitals, and subsequent rates of complications, reoperations, and readmissions among those who underwent surgery.
resultsOne hundred one patients had an evaluation by a multidisciplinary conference from 2015 to 2024 with an initial recommendation against surgery; 9 later met surgical criteria and underwent surgery with our group, while 17 died before this study. Of the remaining 75, 2 were unable to participate due to medical reasons, and 33 were unreachable, leaving 40 survey participants. Nine declined to answer, and thirty-one completed the survey. Among respondents, 71% were satisfied with the recommendation against surgery, and 38.7% sought a second opinion. Of those, 41.7% (5/12) were recommended surgery, and 33% (4/12) underwent surgery elsewhere with minimal complications. Most respondents rated their quality of life as 'acceptable' and used physical therapy and pain management for symptom control.
conclusionWhile most patients were satisfied with our recommendation against surgery, a notable subset sought second opinions, and some ultimately underwent successful surgery. These findings highlight the need for periodic reassessment of multidisciplinary conference criteria to ensure optimal patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40325334What 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.