ArticleSpine deformity2026
Does spasticity affect outcomes in patients with cerebral palsy undergoing posterior spinal fusion?
Article in Spine deformity, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comment on "Does spasticity affect outcomes in patients with cerebral palsy undergoing posterior spinal fusion?"Spine deformity · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe evaluated whether the type of cerebral palsy (CP) (spastic vs. ataxic-hypotonic) affected outcomes in patients who underwent posterior spinal fusion (PSF).
methodsWe queried CP patients from 2008-2020 with GFMCS grade IV or V who underwent PSF with at least 2 years' follow-up. Demographic, radiographic, operative and CPCHILD scores were compared. We performed a matched comparison of patients with spasticity (SP) versus patients with ataxia-hypotonia (AH) by age and coronal curve angle.
resultsFrom 390 CP patients, 309 (79%) were spastic, 20 (5%) ataxic-hypotonic, 11 (3%) dystonic, and 50 (13%) mixed. When comparing matched SP to AH patients, preoperative demographic and radiographic variables were comparable except that SP patients had greater pelvic obliquity (27° vs. 20°, p<0.05), while postoperative pelvic obliquity (9° vs. 6°, p<0.01) was less at 1 and 2 years in the AH group. While surgical time was not different between groups (p>0.05), estimated blood loss (1465±1114 mL vs. 905±798 mL, p<0.01), postoperative pain (8% vs. 0%, p<0.01), and implant prominence (5% vs. 0%, p<0.01) were higher in the SP group. The overall reoperation rates were not different between groups (p>0.05), although the incidence of broken implants (20% vs. 2%, p<0.05) was higher in the AH group and reoperations due to implant failure were higher in the SP group (4% vs. 0%, p<0.05).
conclusionsPatients with spastic CP experienced higher blood loss, more postoperative pain, and greater implant prominence while patients with ataxic-hypotonic CP had less pelvic obliquity but experienced more broken implants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42601540What 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.