ArticleRevista brasileira de ortopedia2026
[Evolution of Surgical Outcomes in Spinal Metastases from Solid Tumors: A Comparative Analysis over 2 Decades].
Article in Revista brasileira de ortopedia, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the evolution of surgical outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for spinal metastases from solid tumors over more than two decades in a single tertiary referral center. Methods: The present retrospective comparative study included 2 cohorts of patients who underwent surgical treatment for spinal metastases: cohort 1 (2002-2015) and cohort 2 (2018-2024). Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. Major postoperative complications (grades III-IV) were analyzed per patient and compared between cohorts. Results: A total of 301 patients were included (175 in cohort 1 and 126 in cohort 2). The more recent cohort demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (log-rank Conclusion: Surgical outcomes for spinal metastases improved over time, particularly in early survival and the reduction of local complications. These findings suggest that refinement in patient selection, prognostic stratification, and multidisciplinary perioperative care may have contributed to this temporal improvement.
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.