In gratitude of the loyal support of our members, the CNS is offering complimentary 2021 Annual Meeting registration to all members! Learn more.

  • The 100 Most Influential Publications in Scoliosis Surgery

    Final Number:
    1323

    Authors:
    Nitin Agarwal MD; James Zhou BS; Michael Koltz MD; Zachary J Tempel MD; Adam S. Kanter MD; David O. Okonkwo MD, PhD; D. Kojo Hamilton MD

    Study Design:
    Other

    Subject Category:

    Meeting: Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2016 Annual Meeting

    Introduction: Previous studies have applied the technique of citation analysis to other areas of study. This is the first paper to apply this technique to the field of scoliosis surgery.

    Methods: A two-step search of the Thomson Reuters Web of Science was conducted to identify all articles relevant to the field of scoliosis surgery. The top 100 articles with the most citations were identified based on analysis of titles and abstracts. Further statistical analysis was conducted to determine whether measures of author reputation and overall publication influence affected the rate at which publications were recognized and incorporated by other researchers in the field.

    Results: Total citations for the final 100 publications included in the list ranged from 82 to 509. The time period for publication ranged from 1954 to 2010. Most studies were published in the journal Spine (n = 63). The most frequently published topics of study were surgical techniques (n = 35) and outcomes (n = 35). Measures of author reputation (number of total studies in the top 100, number of first-author studies in the top 100) were found to have no effect on the rate at which studies were adopted by other researchers (number of years until first citation, number of years until maximum citations). The number of citations/year a publication received was found to be negatively correlated with the rate at which it was adopted by other researchers, indicating that more influential manuscripts attained more rapid recognition by the scientific community at large.

    Conclusions: In assembling this publication, we have strived to identify and recognize the 100 most influential articles in scoliosis surgery research from 1900 to 2015.

    Patient Care: By assembling the 100 most influential articles in scoliosis surgery, we can improve dissemination and accessibility of the literature.

    Learning Objectives: By the conclusion of this session, participants should be able to: 1) Describe the importance of scoilosis surgery, 2) Discuss, in small groups, the most influential papers for deformity surgery, 3) Identify an effective treatment for scoliosis.

    References: 1. Bornmann L, Mutz R. Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. J Assoc Inf Sci Tech 2015;66:2215-22. 2. Coelho DH, Edelmayer LW, Fenton JE. A century of citation classics in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery journals revisited. The Laryngoscope 2014;124:1358-62. 3. Kelly JC, Glynn RW, O'Briain DE, et al. The 100 classic papers of orthopaedic surgery: a bibliometric analysis. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume 2010;92:1338-43. 4. Murray MR, Wang T, Schroeder GD, et al. The 100 most cited spine articles. European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society 2012;21:2059-69. 5. Joyce CW, Kelly JC, Carroll SM. The 100 top-cited classic papers in hand surgery. Journal of plastic surgery and hand surgery 2014;48:227-33. 6. Fenton JE, Roy D, Hughes JP, et al. A century of citation classics in otolaryngology-head and neck Surgery journals. The Journal of laryngology and otology 2002;116:494-8. 7. Steinberger J, Skovrlj B, Caridi JM, et al. The top 100 classic papers in lumbar spine surgery. Spine 2015;40:740-7. 8. King HA, Moe JH, Bradford DS, et al. The selection of fusion levels in thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume 1983;65:1302-13. 9. Jevsevar DS, Karlin LI. The relationship between preoperative nutritional status and complications after an operation for scoliosis in patients who have cerebral palsy. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume 1993;75:880-4. 10. Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, et al. Adult spinal deformity-postoperative standing imbalance: how much can you tolerate? An overview of key parameters in assessing alignment and planning corrective surgery. Spine 2010;35:2224-31. 11. James JIP. IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS - THE PROGNOSIS, DIAGNOSIS, AND OPERATIVE INDICATIONS RELATED TO CURVE PATTERNS AND THE AGE AT ONSET. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-British Volume 1954;36:36-49. 12. Dakwar E, Cardona RF, Smith DA, et al. Early outcomes and safety of the minimally invasive, lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas approach for adult degenerative scoliosis. Neurosurgical focus 2010;28:E8. 13. Isaacs RE, Hyde J, Goodrich JA, et al. A prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter evaluation of extreme lateral interbody fusion for the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis: perioperative outcomes and complications. Spine 2010;35:S322-30. 14. Hicks JM, Singla A, Shen FH, et al. Complications of pedicle screw fixation in scoliosis surgery: a systematic review. Spine 2010;35:E465-70. 15. Harrington PR. Treatment of scoliosis. Correction and internal fixation by spine instrumentation. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume 1962;44-A:591-610. 16. Suk SI, Lee CK, Kim WJ, et al. Segmental pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 1995;20:1399-405. 17. Suk S, II, Kim W-J, Lee S-M, et al. Thoracic Pedicle Screw Fixation in Spinal Deformities. Spine 2001;26:2049-57. 18. Dobbs MB, Lenke LG, Kim YJ, et al. Selective posterior thoracic fusions for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: comparison of hooks versus pedicle screws. Spine 2006;31:2400-4. 19. Akbarnia BA, Breakwell LM, Marks DS, et al. Dual growing rod technique followed for three to eleven years until final fusion: the effect of frequency of lengthening. Spine 2008;33:984-90. 20. Akbarnia BA, Marks DS, Boachie-Adjei O, et al. Dual growing rod technique for the treatment of progressive early-onset scoliosis: a multicenter study. Spine 2005;30:S46-57. 21. Allen BL, Jr., Ferguson RL. The Galveston technique for L rod instrumentation of the scoliotic spine. Spine 1982;7:276-84. 22. Allen BL, Jr., Ferguson RL. The Galveston technique of pelvic fixation with L-rod instrumentation of the spine. Spine 1984;9:388-94. 23. Barr SJ, Schuette AM, Emans JB. Lumbar pedicle screws versus hooks. Results in double major curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 1997;22:1369-79. 24. Betz RR, Harms J, Clements DH, 3rd, et al. Comparison of anterior and posterior instrumentation for correction of adolescent thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 1999;24:225-39. 25. Cotrel Y, Dubousset J. A NEW TECHNIQUE OF SPINE FIXATION BY A POSTERIOR APPROACH IN THE TREATMENT OF SCOLIOSIS. Revue De Chirurgie Orthopedique Et Reparatrice De L Appareil Moteur 1984;70:489-94. 26. Asher M, Min Lai S, Burton D, et al. The reliability and concurrent validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2003;28:63-9. 27. Asher M, Min Lai S, Burton D, et al. Discrimination validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire: relationship to idiopathic scoliosis curve pattern and curve size. Spine 2003;28:74-8. 28. Dickson JH, Mirkovic S, Noble PC, et al. Results of operative treatment of idiopathic scoliosis in adults. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume 1995;77:513-23. 29. White SF, Asher MA, Lai S-M, et al. Patients’ Perceptions of Overall Function, Pain, and Appearance After Primary Posterior Instrumentation and Fusion for Idiopathic Scoliosis. Spine 1999;24:1693. 30. Rüegsegger N, et al. The 100 Most Influential Publications in Cervical Spine Research. Spine 2015. 31. Ioannidis JPA, Boyack KW, Small H, et al. Bibliometrics: Is your most cited work your best? Nature 2014;514:561-2. 32. Macroberts MH, Macroberts BR. Problems of Citation Analysis. Soc Work Res Abstr 1992;28:4-.

We use cookies to improve the performance of our site, to analyze the traffic to our site, and to personalize your experience of the site. You can control cookies through your browser settings. Please find more information on the cookies used on our site. Privacy Policy