Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21786174›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2012

To fuse or not to fuse in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: do baseline symptoms help provide the answer?

F S Kleinstueck, T F Fekete, A F Mannion, D Grob, F Porchet, U Mutter, D Jeszenszky

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in 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. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Decompression with or without concomitant fusion in lumbar stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review.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 · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Decompression plus fusion versus decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.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 · 2017
    Pooled it
  7. Surgery for adult spondylolisthesis: a systematic review of the evidence.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 · 2016
    Pooled it
  8. Preoperative multifidus activation during movement and low back pain worsening after lumbar spinal stenosis surgery: a prospective observational study.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 · 2026
    Article
  9. The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) comes of age: 18 years of efficient and effective patient-reported outcome measurement in the field of spinal disorders. Part 1. Development of the COMI, interpretation of scores, and use in research.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 · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Optimization of radiation doses for open lumbar spinal fusion using C-arm fluoroscopy and impact on radiation-induced cancer: a pilot study.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 · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

F S KleinstueckSpine Center, Schulthess Klinik, Lengghalde 2, 8008 Zürich, Switzerland. frank.kleinstueck@kws.ch
T F Fekete
A F Mannion
D Grob
F Porchet
U Mutter
D Jeszenszky
Schulthess-Klinik · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionClinical symptoms in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) vary from predominantly radiating pain to severe mechanical low back pain. We examined whether the outcome of surgery for LDS varied depending on the predominant baseline symptom and the treatment administered [decompression with fusion (D&F) or decompression alone (D)].

methods213 consecutive patients (69 ± 9 years; 155f, 58 m) participated. Inclusion criteria were LDS, maximum three affected levels, no previous surgery at the affected level, and D (N = 56) or D&F (N = 157) as the operative procedure. Pre-op and at 12 months' follow-up (FU), patients completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) including 0-10 leg-pain (LP) and LBP scales. At 12 months' FU, patients rated global outcome which was then dichotomised into "good" and "poor".

resultsPre-operatively, LBP and COMI scores were significantly worse (p < 0.05) in the D&F group than in the D group. The improvement in COMI at 12 months' FU was significantly greater for D&F than for D (p < 0.001) and was not influenced by the patient's declared "main problem" at baseline (back pain, leg pain, or neurological disturbances) (p > 0.05). There was a higher proportion (p = 0.01) of "good" outcomes at 12 months' FU in D&F (86%) than in D (70%). Multiple regression analysis, controlling for possible confounders, revealed treatment group to be the only significant predictor of outcome (adding fusion = better outcome). DISCUSSION: Our study indicated that LDS patients showed better patient-based outcome with instrumented fusion and decompression than with decompression alone, regardless of baseline symptoms. This may be due to the fact that the underlying slippage as the cause of the stenosis is better addressed with fusion.

Indexed as

Decompression, SurgicalSpinal FusionAgedAged, 80 and overBack PainFemaleHumansIntervertebral Disc DegenerationMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisSpondylolisthesisTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID21786174
PMCPMC3265591
OpenAlexW2049045137

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.