Patent bibliometrics in spinal deformity: the first bibliometric analysis of spinal deformity’s technological literature

• Published in: Spine deformity 2024, Vol.12 (1), p.25-33
• Main Authors: Hani, Ummey, Chen, Jeffrey Wu, Holland, Christopher, McGirt, Matthew J., Kim, Paul K., Chewning, Samuel, Bohl, Michael A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Orthopedics; Review Article
• ISSN: 2212-134X; 2212-1358
• DOI: 10.1007/s43390-023-00767-x

Purpose Bibliometric analyses have gained popularity for studying scientific literature, but their application to evaluate technological literature (patents) remains unexplored. We conducted a bibliometric analysis on the top 100 most-cited patents in scoliosis surgery. Methods Multiple databases were queried using The Lens to identify the top 100 scoliosis surgery patents, which were selected based on forward patent citations. These patents were then categorized into 8 groups based on technological descriptors and assessed based on various factors including earliest priority date, year issued, and expiration status. Results The top 100 most-cited patents included technology underlying anterolateral tethering and distraction systems ( n  = 11), posterior tethering and distraction systems ( n  = 23), posterior segmental bone anchor and rod engagement systems ( n  = 29), interbody devices ( n  = 10), biological and electrophysiological agents for scoliosis treatment and/or improved arthrodesis ( n  = 8), intraoperative arthroplasty devices ( n  = 5), orthotic devices ( n  = 12), and implantable devices for non-invasive, postoperative alterations of skeletal alignment ( n  = 2). Seventy-five patents were expired, 21 are still active, and 4 were listed as inactive. The late 1970s and early 2000s saw increased numbers of patent filings. Demonstrated trends showed no meaningful correlation between patent rank and earliest priority date (linear trendline y  = 0.2648 x – 477.27; R 2  = 0.0114), while a very strong correlation was found between patent rank and citations per year (power trendline y  = 118.82 x −−0.83 ; R 2  = 0.8983). Conclusion Patent bibliometric analyses in the field of spinal deformity surgery provide a means to assess past advancements, better understand what it takes to make a difference in the field, and to potentially facilitate the development of innovative technologies in the future. The method described is a reliable and reproducible technique for evaluating technological literature in our field. Level of evidence 3.