ArticleNeurologia medico-chirurgica2025
Lumbar Stabilization with Interspinous Process Devices for Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis.
Article in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 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
This study reports the treatment outcomes of patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis who underwent lumbar stabilization surgery and evaluates the radiological effects of the surgery at least 1 year post-surgery. Forty consecutive patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis underwent lumbar stabilization surgery using a titanium alloy interspinous spacer between August 2021 and October 2023. The cohort included 19 males and females, respectively, with a mean age of 75.2 years. The surgical level was L1 in 20 patients and L2 in 18 patients. Patients were operated using general anesthesia in 20 patients and local anesthesia in 18. We evaluated their surgical outcomes using the numerical rating scale for pain, the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, and the Japanese Orthopedic Association scores, before surgery and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Radiological effects were also evaluated. All outcomes for the patient showed significant improvement at 6- and 12-months post-surgery. There was no significant change in the area of the dural sac before and after surgery; but the surgical level angle markedly decreased in both neutral and extended positions. Two patients underwent additional treatment post-surgery. This method does not require the removal of the lamina and yellow ligament, does not expose the nerves, and surgery can be performed without suspending antithrombotic drugs. It can also be performed under local anesthesia for patients at high risk for general anesthesia. However, general anesthesia is preferable as local anesthesia may lead to discomfort during surgery.
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.