ArticleBMC surgery2026
Comparative efficacy of total en-bloc spondylectomy and separation surgery followed by stereotactic body radiotherapy for isolated spinal metastases in lung cancer patients: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the clinical efficacy between total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) and separation surgery combined with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SSRS) in patients with isolated spinal metastases secondary to NSCLC.
methodsA total of 85 NSCLC patients diagnosed with isolated spinal metastases were enrolled in this retrospective analysis. All patients received treatment between June 2018 and April 2022, among whom 25 patients underwent TES and the remaining 60 patients were managed with SSRS. Evaluated endpoints included local tumor control, PFS, OS, postoperative complications, and quality of life assessed via the SOSGOQ scale.
resultsTES yielded superior local tumor control and significantly prolonged PFS relative to SSRS. Nevertheless, the TES group presented larger intraoperative blood loss and a higher postoperative complication incidence. Specifically, cerebrospinal fluid leakage occurred in 20% of TES patients and pleural rupture in 12%, whereas both complications only accounted for 3.3% in the SSRS cohort. No significant intergroup difference was observed in OS.
conclusionTES provides superior local tumor control and extended PFS for NSCLC patients with isolated spinal metastases, accompanied by increased intraoperative blood loss and higher complication risks. OS remains comparable between the two therapeutic modalities. Both approaches effectively improve patients' postoperative quality of life. These outcomes highlight the necessity of multidisciplinary collaborative decision-making to individualize and optimize therapeutic strategies for this clinical 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.