SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2015
Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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 86 papers, 7 of them syntheses 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
86 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 202 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does intraoperative reduction result in better outcomes in low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pain and disability after first-time spinal fusion for lumbar degenerative disorders: 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 · 2019Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and lateral lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2018Pooled it
- Total disc replacement versus fusion for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses.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 · 2017Pooled it
- The Outcomes of Minimally Invasive versus Open Posterior Approach Spinal Fusion in Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: The Current Evidence from Prospective Comparative Studies.BioMed research international · 2017Pooled it
- Cost-utility of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: systematic review and economic evaluation.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 · 2015Pooled it
- Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Preliminary Report of Seven Cases with 12-Month Follow-Up.BioMed research international · 2019Trial
- Long-term clinical outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) compared with open TLIF(O-TLIF): A retrospective cohort study for at least 5 years.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 · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of Expandable versus Static Interbody Cages on Subsidence and Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Global spine journal · 2026Review
- Modified Freehand Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Single-Level Degenerative Lumbar Disease: 3-Year Multicenter Retrospective Outcomes.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Minimally Invasive Stabilization Versus Open Surgery for Spinal Metastases: A Retrospective Study Utilizing Propensity Score Matching and Weighting Sensitivity Analyses.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- In-hospital events and resource utilization associated with percutaneous-based vs. open lumbar fusion, stratified by admission status: a national inpatient sample analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Block in Lumbar Fusion Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Opioid-Sparing and Postoperative Pain Outcomes.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- Minimally invasive augmented reality-guided lumbopelvic fixation for a large sacral plasmacytoma: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2025Article
- Morphometric analysis of safe working zones for minimally invasive lateral extrapleural/retroperitoneal approach via transdiaphragmatic and transpsoas to the thoracolumbar and lumbar spine.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Outcome and complication following single-staged posterior minimally invasive surgery in adult spinal deformity.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Perioperative safety and alignment outcomes in minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A retrospective cohort study.Surgical neurology international · 2025Article
26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWhile open TLIF (O-TLIF) remains the mainstay approach, minimally invasive TLIF (MI-TLIF) may offer potential advantages of reduced trauma to paraspinal muscles, minimized perioperative blood loss, quicker recovery and reduced risk of infection at surgical sites. This meta-analysis was conducted to provide an updated assessment of the relative benefits and risks of MI-TLIF versus O-TLIF.
methodsElectronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to December 2014. Relevant studies comparing MI-TLIF and O-TLIF were included. Data were extracted and analysed according to predefined clinical end points.
resultsThere was no significant difference in operation time noted between MI-TLIF and O-TLIF cohorts. The median intraoperative blood loss for MI-TLIF was significantly lower than O-TLIF (median: 177 vs 461 mL; (weighted mean difference) WMD, -256.23; 95% CI -351.35, -161.1; P < 0.00001). Infection rates were significantly lower in the minimally invasive cohort (1.2 vs 4.6%; relative risk (RR), 0.27; 95%, 0.14, 0.53; I2) = 0%; P = 0.0001). VAS back pain scores were significantly lower in the MI-TLIF group compared to O-TLIF (WMD, -0.41; 95% CI -0.76, -0.06; I2 = 96%; P < 0.00001). Postoperative ODI scores were also significantly lower in the minimally invasive cohort (WMD, -2.21; 95% CI -4.26, -0.15; I2 = 93%; P = 0.04).
conclusionsIn summary, the present systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that MI-TLIF appears to be a safe and efficacious approach compared to O-TLIF. MI-TLIF is associated with lower blood loss and infection rates in patients, albeit at the risk of higher radiation exposure for the surgical team. The long-term relative merits require further validation in prospective, randomized studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.