ArticleAsian spine journal2025
Modified Wiltse approach versus conventional posterior approach for treating single-segment spinal tuberculosis and infections: a retrospective study of 102 cases in Guangxi Province, China.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective study. PURPOSE: To compare the modified Wiltse with the conventional posterior approach for single-segment spinal tuberculosis/infections. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Spinal infections (such as spondylitis, discitis, and spondylodiscitis) are therapeutically challenging owing to their pathophysiological complexities and delayed diagnosis, particularly in developing countries. Despite treatment advancements, challenges persist, which include multidrug resistance and surgery-related complications.
methodsA retrospective analysis of 102 patients who underwent single-segment spinal tuberculosis surgery was conducted to compare patients who underwent surgery using the conventional posterior with those using the modified Wiltse approach. The key parameters analyzed included surgical duration, blood loss, complication rates, intensive care unit stay, deformity correction, and neurological improvement.
resultsThe modified Wiltse group exhibited lower intraoperative hemorrhage (184.72 mL vs. 365.91 mL, p<0.05) without significant differences in surgery duration and other tested outcomes. Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in thoracic kyphosis over time (p<0.01) and between the groups, with pairwise comparisons showing significant improvement from preoperative to postoperative and from preoperative to follow-up (p<0.01) but not from postoperative to follow-up, demonstrating postoperative kyphotic stability. Significant improvements in lumbar lordosis (p=0.047) and within the groups (p=0.002) were observed over time; however, pairwise comparisons did not reveal significant differences (p >0.05), demonstrating surgical intervention that focused on lordotic stability rather than correction in both groups. Significant neurological improvements were also observed, with the modified Wiltse group demonstrating superior recovery to the conventional posterior group from baseline.
conclusionsThe modified Wiltse approach offers a promising alternative to conventional techniques by reducing intraoperative blood loss while maintaining efficacy in deformity correction and neurological recovery. It is a viable option for patients who require reduced invasiveness and blood loss.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.