ArticleCureus2026
Cervicothoracolumbar Multiregional Spinal Stenosis (MRSS): Outcomes of Single-Stage Surgery in a Case Series of 28 Patients With a Minimum Two-Year Follow-Up.
Article in Cureus, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Multiregional spinal stenosis (MRSS), defined as concomitant stenosis involving more than two nonconsecutive anatomically distinct spinal regions, represents a complex clinical entity with variable and often overlapping neurological manifestations. The coexistence of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar canal stenosis can obscure the primary symptomatic level, pose diagnostic challenges, and increase the risk of incomplete or staged management. Failure to recognize all affected regions may result in persistent symptoms and suboptimal functional recovery. This study aimed to characterize the clinicoradiological profile of cervicothoracolumbar MRSS and to evaluate the feasibility and perioperative parameters associated with single-stage surgical decompression. Materials and methods A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on 28 consecutive patients who underwent single-stage surgical decompression for MRSS at a tertiary care center between January 2010 and March 2019, with a minimum follow-up duration of 24 months. Preoperative evaluation included a detailed neurological assessment and whole-spine MRI. Demographic characteristics, operative time (ORT), estimated blood loss (EBL), number of decompressed levels, surgical techniques employed, and intraoperative complications were recorded and analyzed. Results The study cohort comprised 28 patients (16 males and 12 females) with a mean age of 53.8 ± 9.6 years (range: 38-74 years). The mean ORT was 171.28 ± 48.13 minutes, and the mean EBL was 394.71 ± 131.14 mL. A total of 344 spinal levels were decompressed (mean: 12.28 levels per patient), involving the cervical (n = 123), thoracic (n = 151), and lumbar (n = 70) regions. Surgical procedures included anterior cervical decompression (n = 3), thoracic posterior instrumentation with pedicle screw fixation (n = 4), thoracic interbody fusion (n = 2), laminectomy (n = 9), and lumbar interbody fusion (n = 10). No major intraoperative complications were encountered. Conclusions MRSS should be strongly suspected in patients presenting with discordant, noncontiguous, or disproportionately severe neurological findings. Whole-spine MRI plays a pivotal role in identifying multiregional involvement and guiding comprehensive surgical planning. Single-stage decompression appears to be a safe and feasible strategy in carefully selected patients, demonstrating acceptable perioperative parameters.
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.