ReviewFrontiers in surgery2026
Unilateral extrapedicular vs. bilateral transpedicular percutaneous kyphoplasty in osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: an exploratory systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Severe osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) may require uniform and symmetrical cement distribution to achieve adequate biomechanical stability. Evidence for the unilateral extrapedicular approach (UEA) in percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) is limited. This study compares the safety and efficacy of UEA vs. bilateral transpedicular approach (BTA) in PKP for OVCFs. Methods: Prospective and retrospective studies comparing UEA and BTA in PKP were identified through searches of Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library. Studies published through January 2026 were included. The study was performed using R version 4.5.1 with the meta package. Results: Four studies, including 394 OVCF patients, were analyzed. UEA-PKP and BTA-PKP demonstrated comparable efficacy in Oswestry Disability Index score, Visual Analog Scale score, kyphotic correction, and vertebral height restoration. However, relative to BTA-PKP, UEA-PKP results in shorter operative duration (MD = -8.43, 95% CI: -10.90 to -5.96), reduced radiation exposure (MD = -7.23, 95% CI: -11.31 to -3.15), lower cement volume (MD = -0.94, 95% CI: -1.57 to -0.32), and is associated with lower cement leakage rate (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.28-0.85). Conclusion: UEA-PKP may offer safety advantages while maintaining similar efficacy compared with BTA-PKP. However, these findings should be interpreted as exploratory, as they are based exclusively on a limited number of retrospective cohort studies.
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.