Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24150437›Full record

Trial reportSpine2014

Quality-of-life outcomes with minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion based on long-term analysis of 304 consecutive patients.

Mick J Perez-Cruet, Namath S Hussain, G Zachary White, Evan M Begun, Robert A Collins, Daniel K Fahim, Girish K Hiremath, Fadumo M Adbi, Sammy A Yacob

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Spine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Iatrogenic muscle damage in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and adjacent segment degeneration: a comparative finite element analysis of open and minimally invasive surgeries.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 · 2021
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. [Comparative study of microendoscope-assisted and conventional minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar diseases].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Minimally invasive techniques for lumbar decompressions and fusions.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2017
    Review
  18. Observational
  19. Review
  20. True anteroposterior view pedicle screw insertion technique.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2016
    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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mick J Perez-CruetFrom the Department of Neurosurgery, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, MI.
Namath S Hussain
G Zachary White
Evan M Begun
Robert A Collins
Daniel K Fahim
Girish K Hiremath
Fadumo M Adbi
Sammy A Yacob
Oakland University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designThis was a prospective clinical study that took place in an outpatient spine clinic.

objectiveTo demonstrate the short-/long-term outcomes from a large cohort of patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MITLIF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Long-term prospective outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive spinal fusion for debilitating back pain has not been well studied.

methodsPresenting diagnosis was determined from clinical findings and radiographical (radiograph, magnetic resonance image, computed tomographic scan) evaluations preoperatively. Patients were assessed with outcome measures preoperatively, and postoperatively at 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, and annually 2 to 7 years (mean follow-up: 47 mo) final follow-up. The rate of postoperative complications and reoperations at the initial level of MITLIF and adjacent level(s) were followed. Fusion rates were assessed blinded and independently by radiograph.

resultsVisual analogue scale scores decreased significantly from 7.0 preoperatively to 3.5 at mean 47-month follow-up. Oswestry Disability Index scores declined from 43.1 preoperatively to 28.2 at mean 47-month follow-up. Short-Form 36 mental component scores increased from 43.8 preoperatively to 49.7 at 47-month follow-up. Short-Form 36 physical component scores increased from 30.6 preoperatively to 39.6 at 47-month follow-up (P < 0.05).

conclusionThis prospectively collected outcomes study shows long-term statistically significant clinical outcomes improvement after MITLIF in patients with clinically symptomatic spondylolisthesis and degenerative disc disease with or without stenosis. MITLIF resulted in a high rate of spinal fusion and very low rate of interbody fusion failure and/or adjacent segment disease requiring reoperation while reducing postoperative complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIntervertebral Disc DegenerationLumbar VertebraeMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresProspective StudiesQuality of LifeRadiographySpinal FusionTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID24150437
PMCPMC4047299
OpenAlexW2017482847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.