Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 206

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Indications and results of combined anterior—posterior approaches for spine tumor surgery

Sundaresan, Narayan, Steinberger, Alfred A., Moore, Frank, Sachdev, Ved Parkash, Krol, George, Hough, Laura, Kelliher, Kevin·1996·Journal of Neurosurgery

Abstract

✓ Spinal instrumentation currently allows gross-total resection and reconstruction in cases of malignancies at all levels of the spine. The authors analyzed the results in 110 patients who underwent surgery for primary and metastatic spinal tumors over a 5-year period (1989–1993) at a single institution. Major primary sites of tumor included breast (14 cases), chordoma (14 cases), lung (12 cases), kidney (11 cases), sarcoma (13 cases), plasmacytoma (10 cases), and others (36 cases). Prior to surgery, 55 patients (50%) had received prior treatment. Forty-eight patients (44%) were nonambulatory, and severe paraparesis was present in 20 patients. Fifty-three patients (48%) underwent combined anterior—posterior resection and instrumentation, 33 (30%) underwent anterior resection with instrumentation, 18 (16%) underwent anterior or posterior resection alone, and the remaining six patients (5%) underwent posterior resection and instrumentation. Major indications for anterior—posterior resection included three-column involvement, high-grade instability, involvement of contiguous vertebral bodies, and solitary metastases. Postoperatively, 90 patients improved neurologically. The overall median survival was 16 months, with 46% of patients surviving 2 years. Fifty-three patients (48%) suffered postoperative complications. Despite the high incidence of complications, the majority of patients reported improvement in their quality of life at follow-up review. Our findings suggest that half of all patients with spinal malignancies require combined anterior—posterior surgery for adequate tumor removal and stabilization.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3171/jns.1996.85.3.0438

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 206

Metadata

Authors
Sundaresan, N., Steinberger, A. A., Moore, F., Sachdev, V. P., Krol, G., Hough, L., & Kelliher, K.
Venue
Journal of Neurosurgery
Published
1996-09
Volume
85
Issue
3
Pages
438-446
ISSN
0022-3085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2139086237
Cited by
206
References
1
FWCI
7.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Indications and results of combined anterior—posterior approaches for spine tumor surgery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3171/jns.1996.85.3.0438
The paper
Sundaresan, N., Steinberger, A. A., Moore, F., Sachdev, V. P., Krol, G., Hough, L., & Kelliher, K. (1996). Indications and results of combined anterior—posterior approaches for spine tumor surgery. Journal of Neurosurgery. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1996.85.3.0438

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.