ArticleWorld journal of orthopedics2015
Perioperative outcomes in minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery: A systematic review.
Article in World journal of orthopedics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally invasive versus open Transforaminal lumbar Interbody fusion in obese patients: a meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2018Pooled it
- Efficacy analysis of percutaneous cannulated paravertebral approach for microscopic resection of intraspinal schwannomas: A case series.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Advanced Visualization in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: The Ergonomics, Economics, and Evolution of Camera-Based Tubes and Retractors.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Two-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes for Percutaneous Lumbar Interbody Fusion With an Expandable Titanium Cage Through Kambin's Triangle Without Facetectomy.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Inducing Angiogenesis in the Nucleus Pulposus.Cells · 2023Article
- Practical answers to frequently asked questions in minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery.The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society · 2023Review
- Improvement following minimally invasive lumbar decompression in patients 80 years or older compared with younger age groups.Journal of neurosurgery. Spine · 2022Article
- Beyond Placement of Pedicle Screws - New Applications for Robotics in Spine Surgery: A Multi-Surgeon, Single-Institution Experience.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- Percutaneous Lumbar Interbody Fusion With an Expandable Titanium Cage Through Kambin's Triangle: A Case Series With Initial Clinical and Radiographic Results.International journal of spine surgery · 2021Article
- Facet Violation With Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement: Impact of 3D Navigation and Facet Orientation.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2021Article
- Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion With a Single Oblique PEEK Cage and Posterior Supplemental Fixation.International journal of spine surgery · 2020Article
- How do high preoperative pain scores impact the clinical course and outcomes for patients undergoing lumbar microdiscectomy?Journal of neurosurgery. Spine · 2020Article
- Article
- Complications associated with L4-5 anterior retroperitoneal trans-psoas interbody fusion: a single institution series.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2020Article
- Does interbody cage lordosis impact actual segmental lordosis achieved in minimally invasive lumbar spine fusion?Neurosurgical focus · 2020Article
- Risk factors predicting less favorable outcomes in endoscopic lumbar discectomies.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2020Article
- Using minimally invasive techniques adds to the value equation for select patients.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2019Review
- Spinal navigation for minimally invasive thoracic and lumbosacral spine fixation: implications for radiation exposure, operative time, and accuracy of pedicle screw placement.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 · 2018Observational
- Simultaneous navigated cervico-thoracic and thoraco-lumbar fixation.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 · 2018Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare minimally invasive (MIS) and open techniques for MIS lumbar laminectomy, direct lateral and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgeries with respect to length of surgery, estimated blood loss (EBL), neurologic complications, perioperative transfusion, postoperative pain, postoperative narcotic use, and length of stay (LOS).
methodsA systematic review of previously published studies accessible through PubMed was performed. Only articles in English journals or published with English language translations were included. Level of evidence of the selected articles was assessed. Statistical data was calculated with analysis of variance with P < 0.05 considered statistically significant.
resultsA total of 11 pertinent laminectomy studies, 20 direct lateral studies, and 27 TLIF studies were found. For laminectomy, MIS techniques resulted in a significantly longer length of surgery (177.5 min vs 129.0 min, P = 0.04), shorter LOS (4.3 d vs 5.3 d, P = 0.01) and less perioperative pain (visual analog scale: 16 ± 17 vs 34 ± 31, P = 0.04). There is evidence of decreased narcotic use for MIS patients (postoperative intravenous morphine use: 9.3 mg vs 42.8 mg), however this difference is of unknown significance. Direct lateral approaches have insufficient comparative data to establish relative perioperative outcomes. MIS TLIF had superior EBL (352 mL vs 580 mL, P < 0.0001) and LOS (7.7 d vs 10.4 d, P < 0.0001) and limited data to suggest lower perioperative pain.
conclusionBased on perioperative outcomes data, MIS approach is superior to open approach for TLIF. For laminectomy, MIS and open approaches can be chosen based on surgeon preference. For lateral approaches, there is insufficient evidence to find non-inferior perioperative outcomes at this time.
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.