↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Mini-open pedicle subtraction osteotomy as a treatment for severe adult spinal deformities: case series with initial clinical and radiographic outcomes.
Published in
Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, January 2016
DOI 10.3171/2015.7.spine15188
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Y Wang, Gerd Bordon

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) is a powerful but high-risk surgical technique for destabilizing the spine for deformity correction in both the sagittal and coronal planes. Numerous reports have demonstrated the benefits of this technique for realigning the spine in a physiological posture; however, the open surgical technique is associated with a high complication rate. In this report the authors review data obtained in a series of patients who underwent PSO through a less invasive approach. METHODS Sixteen patients with severe coronal- and/or sagittal-plane deformities were treated in this series. Conservative measures had failed in all cases and patients had undergone a single-level PSO or extended PSO at L-2 or L-3. Fixation was accomplished using percutaneous instrumentation and interbody or facet joint fusions were used at the remaining levels. None of the procedures were aborted or converted to a traditional open procedure. Standard clinical and radiographic measures were used to assess patient outcomes. RESULTS Mean age was 68.8 years and mean follow-up duration was 17.7 months. An average of 7.6 levels were fused, and 50% of the patients had bilateral iliac screw fixation, with all constructs crossing both the thoracolumbar and lumbosacral junctions. Operative time averaged 356 ± 50 minutes and there was a mean blood loss of 843 ± 339 ml. The leg visual analog scale score improved from a mean of 5.7 ± 2.7 to one of 1.3 ± 1.6, and the back visual analog scale score improved from a mean of 8.6 ± 1.3 to one of 2.4 ± 2.1. The Oswestry Disability Index score improved from a mean of 50.1 ± 14.4 to 16.4 ± 12.7, representing a mean reduction of 36.0 ± 16.9 points. The SF-36 physical component summary score changed from a mean of 43.4 ± 2.6 to one of 47.0 ± 4.3, and the SF-36 mental component summary score changed from a mean of 46.7 ± 3.6 to 46.30 ± 3.0. Coronal alignment improved from a mean of 27.9 ± 43.6 mm to 16.0 ± 17.2 mm. The lumbar Cobb angle improved from a mean of 41.2° ± 18.4° to 15.4° ± 9.6°, and lumbar lordosis improved from 23.1° ± 15.9° to 48.6° ± 11.7°. Pelvic tilt improved from a mean of 33.7° ± 8.6° to 24.4° ± 6.5°, and the sagittal vertical axis improved from 102.4 ± 73.4 mm to 42.2 ± 39.9 mm. The final lumbar lordosis-pelvic incidence difference averaged 8.4° ± 12.1°. There were 4 patients who failed to achieve less than or equal to a 10° mismatch on this parameter. Ten of the 16 patients underwent delayed postoperative CT, and 8 of these had developed a solid arthrodesis at all levels treated. A total of 6 complications occurred in this series. There were no cases of symptomatic proximal junction kyphosis. CONCLUSIONS Advancements in minimally invasive technique have resulted in the ability to manage increasingly complex deformities with hybrid approaches. In this limited series, the authors describe the results of utilizing a tissue-sparing mini-open PSO to correct severe spinal deformities. This method was technically feasible in all cases with acceptable radiographic outcomes similar to open surgery. However, high complication rates associated with these deformity corrections remain problematic.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 72 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Other 4 5%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 25 34%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 42%
Psychology 6 8%
Engineering 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 24 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 May 2016.
All research outputs
#6,783,586
of 34,451,315 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine
#568
of 2,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,523
of 447,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine
#15
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,451,315 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,425 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 447,239 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.