ReviewNorth American Spine Society journal2026
Hollow viscus perforation after spine surgery: A focused review with illustrative cases.
Review in North American Spine Society 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hollow viscus perforation following spine surgery is uncommon but associated with substantial morbidity and mortality when diagnosis is delayed. Early recognition is challenging because presenting symptoms frequently overlap with expected postoperative bowel dysfunction, and imaging findings may initially be subtle. Despite its clinical significance, the literature remains fragmented across case reports and small series, and a consolidated, mechanism-based framework specific to spine surgery is lacking. Methods: We performed a single-institution case series of five patients who developed hollow viscus perforation or significant postoperative intra-abdominal pathology after spine surgery, combined with a comprehensive review of the published literature. Data were analyzed to identify common mechanisms of injury, clinical presentation patterns, diagnostic pathways, management strategies, and preventive considerations. Results: Hollow viscus perforation after spine surgery occurred through four principal mechanisms: direct mechanical injury, functional distension related to acute colonic pseudo-obstruction physiology, delayed hardware or graft migration, and medication-associated ulceration or diverticular perforation. Early clinical findings frequently overlapped with expected postoperative bowel dysfunction, contributing to delayed recognition. Diagnosis depended on identifying deviations from expected recovery trajectories and obtaining timely computed tomography imaging. Preventive strategies included recognition of preoperative abdominal risk factors, meticulous exposure-specific surgical technique, optimization of postoperative bowel function, and judicious use of medications that impair gastrointestinal motility or tissue integrity. Conclusions: Hollow viscus perforation following spine surgery is an uncommon but potentially catastrophic complication arising from distinct mechanical, functional, hardware-related, and medication-associated pathways. Because early signs are often nonspecific, a low threshold for imaging and general surgical evaluation is essential. Improved preoperative risk stratification, intraoperative vigilance, and structured postoperative monitoring may reduce delays in diagnosis and improve outcomes in this high-risk population.
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.