ReviewAsian spine journal2026
Evaluation of fusion status after spine fusion surgery: a comprehensive review.
Review in Asian spine journal, 2026. 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
Accurate assessment of fusion status following spinal fusion surgery is paramount, as it closely relates to patient outcomes and quality of life. Multiple imaging modalities have been developed to evaluate fusion, each with distinct advantages and limitations. Plain radiography remains the most accessible and practical method, with dynamic flexion-extension radiographs providing reasonably reliable information on segmental motion and stability. Computed tomography offers superior spatial resolution and enables direct visualization of trabecular bone bridging between vertebral segments, making it the most accurate modality for confirming fusion. Magnetic resonance imaging and radionuclide imaging can serve as complementary techniques, particularly when conventional methods are inconclusive or contraindicated. This review summarizes the strengths and limitations of each imaging modality used for assessing spinal fusion. It also highlights recent technological advances and emerging diagnostic approaches that may enhance the objectivity, reliability, and accuracy of fusion assessment in the future.
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.