Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41393771›Full record

ArticleSpine surgery and related research2025

Comparison of Anterior Spinal Bridging and Sagittal Spinal Parameters in Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis and Axial Spondylitis: A Multicenter Study.

Takuya Takahashi, Kanji Mori, Shigeto Kobayashi, Hisashi Inoue, Kurisu Tada, Naoto Tamura, Takashi Hirai, Yu Matsukura, Satoru Egawa, Satoshi Tamura and 10 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Takuya TakahashiDepartment of Orthopedics, Institute of Science Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Kanji MoriDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Shiga University of Medical Science, Shiga, Japan.
Shigeto KobayashiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Juntendo University Koshigaya Hospital, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Saitama, Japan.
Hisashi InoueDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Kurisu TadaDepartment of Internal Medicine and Rheumatology, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Naoto TamuraDepartment of Internal Medicine and Rheumatology, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Takashi HiraiDepartment of Orthopedics, Institute of Science Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yu MatsukuraDepartment of Orthopedics, Institute of Science Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Satoru EgawaDepartment of Orthopedics, Institute of Science Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Satoshi TamuraDepartment of Orthopedics, Institute of Science Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Narihito NagoshiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan.
Satoshi MakiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.
Keiichi KatsumiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Niigata Central Hospital, Niigata, Japan.
Masao KodaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.
Kazuma MurataDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
Kazuhiro TakeuchiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, National Hospital Organization Okayama Medical Center, Okayama, Japan.
Hiroaki NakashimaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Shiro ImagamaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Yoshiharu KawaguchiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama, Japan.
Toshitaka YoshiiDepartment of Orthopedics, Institute of Science Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: To evaluate the differences in anterior spinal bridging and sagittal spinal parameters between patients with diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) using whole-spine computed tomography (CT). Methods: This retrospective study included patients with DISH (n=111) and AS (n=27). The number of anterior spinal bridges and sagittal spinal parameters was evaluated. The sagittal vertical axis (SVA) evaluated by whole-spine CT was defined as sup-SVA. Patients were further evaluated by matching their age and sex. Results: Anterior spinal bridging frequently occurred in the thoracic spine in DISH and AS. In AS, bridging occurred in the lumbar spine according to the number of anterior spinal bridges. Sup-SVA and T5-T12 thoracic kyphosis (TK) were significantly greater in AS, and lumbar lordosis (LL) was significantly smaller in AS. TK was greater according to the number of anterior spinal bridges in both DISH and AS. Sup-SVA in DISH was greater according to the number of anterior spinal bridges, especially in the thoracic spine, whereas it was greater according to the lumbar in AS. LL in AS was smaller according to the number of lumbar bridges. Sup-SVA in DISH correlated with TK, whereas it correlated with both TK and LL in AS. Conclusions: In patients with AS, the spine tends to bridge from the lumbar to the thoracic spine, causing kyphosis in the thoracolumbar spine. In patients with DISH, the spine tends to bridge from the thoracic spine, causing kyphosis in the thoracic spine. Thus, sup-SVA is greater in AS than in DISH.

Indexed as

ankylosing spondylitisanterior spinal bridgingdiffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosissagittal spinal parameterswhole spine CT

Identifiers

PMID41393771
PMCPMC12696462

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.