ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2025
Implant density reduction to avoid proximal junctional failure in adult spine surgery: Computer models and simulations.
Article in North American Spine Society journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Physeal effects of posterior VBT are not uniform throughout a multi-tether construct in the kyphotic swine model.Spine deformity · 2026Article
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: Proximal Junctional Failure (PJF) is a common complication in Adult Spine Deformity (ASD) surgeries, often leading to reoperations. While revision surgeries with osteotomies carry high complication rate of 34.8%, alternatives such as hardware proximal extension may increase PJF risk in patients with severe Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) scores. Implant Density Reduction (IDR) has emerged to mitigate PJF risk. This study assessed the impact of IDR on PJF risk and explored sub-optimal strategies. Methods: Two patient-personalized Finite Element (FE) models were used and expanded into a virtual cohort. Implant Density (ID), rod material, bone quality, and GAP were systematically varied. Thoracolumbar FE models were developed using structured Statistical Shape Modeling (SSM). Biomechanical metrics of Intervertebral Disk (IVD) fiber strain, Screw Pull-out Force (SPF), and rod stress, were evaluated. Trade-off analyses could determine sub-optimal configurations avoiding PJF. Results: IDR significantly decreased IVD strain (up to -70%) and improved screw stability (up to +142%), for patients with titanium (Ti) rods and normal bone. However, IDR effectiveness was limited for cases with GAP ≥12, osteoporotic bone, and Cobalt-Chromium (Cr-Co) rods. No IDR strategy could prevent PJF for cases with GAP 12 or 13, regardless of rod type. For cases with GAP 11 and Upper Instrumented Vertebra (UIV) at T10, IDR was effective with only Ti rods. For cases with GAP 13 and UIV at T3, none of IDRs, independent of rod material, offered benefit. Notably, Ti rods may support IDR-based risk reduction in borderline cases, such as GAP 12, UIV at T3. Conclusions: IDR is a promising strategy to lower PJF risk in high-risk spine revision cases, though its effectiveness depends on surgical and anatomical factors. This study provides an in-silico tool to support personalized surgical planning and guide future clinical trials aimed at reducing reoperations and healthcare costs.
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.