Trial reportNeurosurgery2026
Use of an Expert Panel for Symptomatic Patients With Grade I Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Neurosurgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03570801 (SLIP II Registry), which is not on this 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.
SLIP II Registry: Spinal Laminectomy to Laminectomy With Instrumented Pedicle Screw Fusion for Lumbar Stenosis With Grade I Spondylolisthesis
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
31 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe appropriate utilization of lumbar fusion when performing laminectomy for lumbar spondylolisthesis is uncertain. The objective was to determine whether the use of a surgical expert review panel recommending fusion might improve patient selection, possibly reducing surgical failures.
methodsRandomized clinical trial of patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar stenosis with spondylolisthesis enrolled from 14 North American hospitals was conducted with patients randomized to receive an expert panel review of their case or not. Spinal expert review consisted of 10 to 15 surgeons' review of patient images and clinical data with voting on the appropriateness of fusion. Primary outcome was the percentage of patients who failed to improve their 1-year EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) score. Secondary analysis focused on whether a supermajority (>80% consensus) of spinal experts recommending fusion might reduce operative failures. The trial (SLIP II) was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03570801).
resultsBetween November 1, 2017, and June 30, 2022, 663 patients were randomized (mean age 65.6 years; [59.6%] female) and 523 of 574 patients (91%; who had surgery) were included in the 1-year analysis. Final follow-up was on March 5, 2024. Among the 523 patients, 270 underwent review and 253 had no review. The overall surgical failure rate (using EQ-5D) did not differ between the review groups, 16.7% vs 17.4% (no review: difference 0.7%; 95% CI, -8% to 6%; P = .92). However, with supermajority recommending fusion, the proportion of patients who failed to improve EQ-5D score after surgery was 8.4% (review group) vs 18.4% (nonreview group: difference 10%; 95% CI, 2%-18%; P = .03). Supermajority recommendation for fusion was associated with 0.296 vs 0.240 EQ-5D change in the nonreview group (difference 0.056, 95% CI, 0.002-0.108; P = .04).
conclusionAmong patients with grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, an expert panel review with a supermajority favoring fusion was associated with a greater improvement in health-related quality of life and fewer surgical failures.
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.