ReviewCureus2025
Bisphosphonate Use in Acute Spinal Cord Injury: A Focused Systematic Review on Zoledronic Acid.
Review in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal cord injury (SCI) causes significant bone loss as a long-term complication, increasing fracture risk and healthcare costs. Bisphosphonates are widely studied for mitigating bone loss since they can prevent fractures and preserve rehabilitation potential in acute SCI patients. Zoledronic acid, in particular, stands out due to its high potency, dosing convenience, and better patient adherence. This review aims to evaluate the efficacy of bisphosphonates, particularly zoledronic acid, in mitigating bone loss in acute SCI. A systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines using PubMed, ScienceDirect, PubMed Central (PMC), Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases. Studies from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2024, on bisphosphonate use within six months of SCI were included. Randomized controlled trials using zoledronic acid as the intervention and meta-analyses or systematic reviews covering all bisphosphonates were selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Eight studies, comprising three meta-analyses and five randomized controlled trials with 729 participants, were selected after quality assessment using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) and a revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). Seven studies demonstrated significant bone mineral density (BMD) improvements at the total hip, four at the lumbar spine, two at the trochanter, and five at the femoral neck. Two meta-analyses performed subgroup analyses of zoledronic acid, demonstrating substantial bone loss reduction, although comparisons with other bisphosphonates were lacking. Reductions in bone resorption markers, such as C-terminal telopeptide (CTX), were observed in five studies. While zoledronic acid exhibits strong anti-resorptive effects and allows for practical intravenous administration, its limited impact on bone formation markers, such as P1NP, and inconsistent BMD improvements across skeletal sites require further investigation. Future studies should assess long-term outcomes, utilize advanced imaging techniques, and directly compare zoledronic acid with other bisphosphonates.
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.