ArticleCureus2025
Percutaneous Versus Open Management of Thoracic and Lumbar Hyperostotic Fractures: A Case-Control Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Surgical outcomes following spinal fusion for cervical versus noncervical fractures in ankylosing spondylitis and DISH.North American Spine Society journal · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background This study aims to examine the surgical outcomes and complications associated with minimally invasive stabilization using percutaneous pedicle screws (MIS-PPS) versus open surgical management (OSM) among patients with spine fractures in the setting of hyperostotic spine diagnosis. Methodology This retrospective, case-control study was conducted at a single Level I Trauma Center, including 30 consecutive patients (nine ankylosing spondylitis patients and 21 diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis patients) who underwent surgery for thoracolumbar extension-distraction fractures. Collected data included patient demographics, comorbidities, injury mechanism, spine region, fracture level, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Continuous variables included age, body mass index, estimated blood loss, operative time, number of levels instrumented, and length of stay. Results Between 2002 and 2020, 15 patients underwent MIS-PPS (3 females, 12 males, average age of 75.3 years) and 15 underwent OSM (3 females, 12 males, average age of 73.6 years). The MIS-PPS group had significantly lower blood loss (95 ± 31.6 mL vs. 643.3 ± 534.4 mL; p < 0.001) and shorter operative time (130.7 ± 36.4 minutes vs. 208.7 ± 41.8 minutes; p < 0.001). They also required fewer levels of instrumentation (5.2 vs. 6.8; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in postoperative infection rates, epidural hematomas, or implant revisions between the groups. Conclusions MIS-PPS provides the benefits of reduced blood loss, shorter operative time, and fewer levels of instrumentation compared to OSM, with no significant differences in postoperative complications.
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.