ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2026
Pedicle Screw Loosening After Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Surgery and an Analytical Review of Recurrent Loosening: Based on Revision Surgery Experience.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 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
BACKGROUND Although pedicle screw fixation is widely used in lumbar spinal fusion, screw loosening, which is well described in patients with osteoporosis, remains a clinically relevant yet insufficiently investigated problem in individuals without osteoporosis, particularly regarding revision strategies and risk factors for recurrence. This study aimed to identify risk factors for recurrent pedicle screw loosening after revision surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis using bone grafting, cement augmentation, and longer and larger-diameter screws. MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective review included 1063 patients who underwent lumbar instrumentation between January 2021 and January 2025. Screw loosening was defined on computed tomography (CT) as a radiolucent zone greater than 1 mm or a "double-halo" sign. Seventeen patients without osteoporosis developed loosening. In these cases, the original screw tract was preserved, reinforced with allograft and semi-cured cement, and revised using screws 5 mm longer and 1 mm wider. At 3-month follow-up, patients were classified into no recurrent loosening (group A) or recurrent loosening (group B) based on CT findings. RESULTS Screw loosening occurred in 17 multilevel cases. Mean patient age was 60.9 ± 11.1 years; 41.2% were male. Recurrent loosening occurred in 52.9% (9/17). Group A had a significantly higher T-score than did group B (-0.70 ± 0.93 vs -1.18 ± 0.77; P = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS The combined revision approach provided acceptable short-term stability. Lower T-scores were associated with recurrent loosening despite the absence of osteoporosis. Multilevel instrumentation increased the risk of primary loosening. Larger multicenter studies are warranted to confirm these findings.
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.