ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025
Comparative analysis of single-stage versus two-stage fusion surgeries for adult spinal deformity: radiographic outcomes, clinical improvements, and complication rates.
Article in 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, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare single-stage and two-stage corrective fusion surgeries for adult spinal deformity (ASD), focusing on radiographic and clinical outcomes, and surgery-related complications.
methodsA retrospective cohort study of 245 ASD patients who underwent spinal fusion surgery involving three or more vertebral levels was conducted. Patients were categorized into single-stage and two-stage groups. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for age, surgical procedure, and radiographical parameters. Radiographic parameters, complication rates, and the Japanese Orthopaedics Association (JOA) score were compared
resultsAfter matching for clinical background, the two-stage group showed longer surgery times (493.7 ± 157.2 min vs. 271.3 ± 125.7 min, p < 0.001) and greater estimated blood loss (1617.1 ± 1276.9 mL vs. 1067.5 ± 1274.0 mL, p < 0.001). Surgery-related complication rates were similar between the two groups (20.0% vs. 20.0%, p = 1.000). At two years post-surgery, the two-stage group demonstrated significantly superior JOA score improvement (100.9 ± 84.5% vs. 68.2 ± 62.6%, p = 0.017), lower pelvic tilt (23.6 ± 11.3° vs. 29.1 ± 14.7°, p = 0.023) and a trend towards smaller sagittal vertical axis (40.6 ± 42.7 mm vs. 58.9 ± 58.7 mm, p = 0.075).
conclusionsComparative analysis with matched clinical backgrounds revealed that the two-stage approach maintained equivalent complication rates while achieving sufficient correction effects and favorable clinical score improvements at two years post-surgery. To elucidate the relationship between individual surgical strategies and personalized complication risks, further research is necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40498330What 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.