ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
The Conundrum of Spinal Metastases-A Review of Current Management.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal metastasis remains a significant clinical issue, frequently resulting in substantial pain and disability among cancer patients. Conventional management strategies have historically included chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and open surgical intervention. However, advancements in minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS) have notably shifted the therapeutic landscape. This review examines recent evidence surrounding MISS, directly comparing it to traditional open procedures. Current literature demonstrates that MISS typically results in reduced intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospitalization durations, decreased infection rates, and functional outcomes that are at least equivalent-if not superior-to those of open surgery. Additionally, the emergence of hybrid therapeutic approaches-specifically, the utilization of separation surgery followed by stereotactic radiosurgery-has shown promise in achieving local tumor control, particularly in select malignancies. This narrative review also evaluates contemporary clinical decision-making frameworks such as NOMS, LMNOP, and NESMS. Further, it advocates for the integration of advanced prognostic tools and tumor genomics to enable more personalized treatment strategies for individuals with spinal metastasis.
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.