Evidence mapPaperPMID 42384174Full record

ReviewOrthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026

[Surgical management of spinal metastases].

Lars Wessels, Julia Onken, Peter Vajkoczy

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lars WesselsKlinik für Neurochirurgie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland.
Julia OnkenKlinik für Neurochirurgie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland.
Peter VajkoczyKlinik für Neurochirurgie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland. Peter.Vajkoczy@charite.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpinal metastases from malignant tumors represent an increasingly relevant clinical problem due to improved systemic therapies, prolonged survival, and the growing prevalence of long-term survivors with metastatic disease. The spine is not only a central biomechanical component of the musculoskeletal system, but also protects the spinal cord and spinal nerves. Accordingly, the treatment of spinal metastases is complex and must always be embedded within an overarching oncological treatment concept. BASICS: This review summarizes epidemiological and pathophysiological principles and presents contemporary indications and operative strategies for spinal metastases. The central goals of surgery are histological diagnosis, decompression of neural structures, restoration or preservation of mechanical stability, pain relief, and maintenance of neurological function and quality of life. Surgical decision-making should be interdisciplinary and should consider not only imaging findings and neurological status, but also tumor biology, radiosensitivity, systemic treatment options, prognosis, patient preference, and rehabilitation potential. THERAPY: Modern surgical treatment of spinal metastases has undergone a paradigm shift: maximal tumor resection is no longer routinely the primary objective; instead, the focus has shifted toward function-preserving, low-morbidity interventions embedded within a multimodal treatment strategy. Concepts such as NOMS, SINS, and the Bilsky grading system support structured decision-making.

aimsMinimally invasive procedures, percutaneous instrumentation, navigation, intraoperative three-dimensional imaging, modern implant materials, and increasingly AI-based prognostic models allow a patient-specific calibration of surgical invasiveness. The overall aim is to preserve neurological function and quality of life, control local tumor progression, and minimize treatment-delaying morbidity.

Indexed as

Minimally invasive surgeryQuality of lifeRadiosurgerySpinal fusionSpinal neoplasms

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.