ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2015
Comparison of clinical outcomes following minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion stratified by preoperative diagnosis.
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, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Degenerative spondylolisthesis: contemporary review of the role of interbody fusion.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2017Pooled it
- Article
- The Evolution of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Journey from Past to Present.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Efficacy and Safety of the Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF) Technique in Spine Surgery: Meta-Analysis of 1409 Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- The Utility and Appropriateness of Single-Position Circumferential Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using O-Arm-Based Navigation in the Novel Oblique Position.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Clinical outcomes, MRI evaluation and predictive factors of indirect decompression with lateral transpsoas approach for lumbar interbody fusion: a multicenter experience.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Article
- Comparison of Posterior Pedicle Screw Fixation and Lateral Fixation in the Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion in Lumbar Degenerative Disease Patients with Osteopenia or Osteoporosis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Article
- Article
- Bowel Injury and Insidious Pneumoperitoneum after Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Asian spine journal · 2022Article
- Respective Correction Rates of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Comparison of Simultaneous Single-Position Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation with Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using O-arm Navigated Technique for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) in a consecutive series of 72 patients.Bosnian journal of basic medical sciences · 2021Article
- Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion for Thoracic and Thoracolumbar Disease: The Diaphragm Dilemma.Global spine journal · 2021Article
- The usefulness and safety of the simultaneous parallel anterior and posterior combined lumbar spine surgery using intraoperative 3D fluoroscopy-based navigation (SPAPS).North American Spine Society journal · 2021Article
- Perspective on the true incidence of bowel perforations occurring with extreme lateral lumbar interbody fusions. How should they be treated?Surgical neurology international · 2021Review
- Clinical and Radiological Results After Minimally Invasive Transpsoas Lateral Access Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Stenosis.Global spine journal · 2020Article
- Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: What Is the Evidence of Indirect Neural Decompression? A Systematic Review of the Literature.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2020Review
- Prone single-position extreme lateral interbody fusion (Pro-XLIF): preliminary results.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 · 2020Article
- Perioperative Factors Influencing Postoperative Satisfaction After Lateral Access Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.International journal of spine surgery · 2019Article
- Decreased estimated blood loss in lateral trans-psoas versus anterior approach to lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLumbar fusion has been shown to be effective in treating a variety of degenerative spinal conditions, though significant differences exist in the magnitude of clinical improvement across different surgical diagnoses. With modern, minimally disruptive approaches for fusion, diagnosis-specific differences in clinical improvement may be reduced. The purpose of this study is to report and compare interim clinical improvements in patients treated with XLIF for various degenerative lumbar conditions.
methods160 patients underwent XLIF for either degenerative spondylolisthesis (n = 68), degenerative disc disease (n = 20), adjacent segment disease (n = 26), or post-laminectomy syndrome (n = 46). Average age was 61 years and 66 % were female. Mean BMI was 28.9 kg/m(2). 37 % were smokers, 23 % had diabetes mellitus, 22 % had depression. Mean age was highest for ASD patients (66 years) and lowest for DDD patients (48 years) (p < 0.001). There were no other baseline demographic differences between groups. Patient-reported clinical outcomes measures were collected at baseline and prospectively at standard intervals. Interim results at an average of 19 months follow-up are reported here.
resultsIn total, 197 levels were treated with XLIF (mean 1.2 per patient). There were no cases of symptomatic pseudoarthrosis or implant/instrument failure. Overall, 1 patient (0.6 %) had a major complication and 12 % had a minor complication. Approach-related anterolateral thigh/groin sensory changes were present in 14 % and hip flexion weakness in 9 %. At last follow-up, overall ODI decreased 47 % (44.1-23.5), VAS LBP decreased 59 % (6.9-2.8), VAS LP decreased 56 % (7.1-3.1), and SF-36 PCS improved 40 % (30.9-43.2) (all p < 0.001). Baseline ODI was significantly lower for DDD patients (p = 0.052). At last follow-up, mean percent improvements on all outcomes were highest for DSP group, though not all differences were significant. Improvements between diagnostic groups were statistically different for LBP (p = 0.021), but were similar for all other clinical outcomes. Percentage of patients reaching MCID and SCB thresholds ranged from 60 to 95 % in clinical outcomes. Patient satisfaction for the entire group was 93 % when asked whether satisfied with surgical outcome.
conclusionsXLIF has been demonstrated in the current series to lead to significant improvements in clinical outcomes and high rates of MCID and SCB and reduce the discrepancy in outcomes between well accepted and technically challenging indications compared to traditional open approaches for IBF. Complication rates were low, with only one patient in the series experiencing a major complication. Further investigation with larger cohorts and longer follow-up is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25813006What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.