ReviewJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2016
Comparison of ALIF vs. XLIF for L4/5 interbody fusion: pros, cons, and literature review.
Review in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.
- Defining cage subsidence in anterior, oblique, and lateral lumbar spine fusion approaches: a systematic review of the literature.Neurosurgical review · 2024Pooled it
- Anterior lumbar interbody fusion augmented with anterior screw fixation for the treatment of L5/S1 spondylolisthesis: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2026Article
- Early pain relief and segmental realignment after two-stage lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with posterior instrumentation in degenerative lumbar pathology.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
- One-year CT evaluation of fusion in adult spinal deformity using supplemental anterior lumbar interbody fusion.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
- Lumbar interbody fusion via anterior lumbar interbody fusion versus oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a narrative review for surgeons.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Review
- Does Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Reduce Mechanical Complication and Pseudarthrosis Rate at the Lumbosacral Junction in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery in Comparison to Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion?International journal of spine surgery · 2025Article
- Comparative analysis of acute postoperative pain and opioid use between lateral transpsoas, anterior, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- Comparative analysis of anterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in clinical outcomes: ALIF associated with lower rates of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in a long-term follow-up study.International orthopaedics · 2025Article
- The anterior intercrest line is a novel, accurate surface marking for identifying the L4/5 disc level: a prospective agreement study with fluoroscopy.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- Anterior lumbar interbody fusion: patient selection and workup.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2024Review
- Impact of bone density and integrated screw configuration on standalone anterior lumbar interbody construct strength.North American Spine Society journal · 2024Article
- Pros and Cons of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery.Advances and technical standards in neurosurgery · 2024Review
- Risk Factors for Blood Transfusions in Elective Single-Level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Conditions.The Iowa orthopaedic journal · 2023Article
- Article
- Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PETLIF): Current Techniques, Clinical Outcomes, and Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Biomechanical Comparison of Multilevel Stand-Alone Lumbar Lateral Interbody Fusion With Posterior Pedicle Screws: An In Vitro Study.Neurospine · 2023Article
- Approach-related anatomical differences in patients with lumbo-sacral transitional vertebrae undergoing lumbar fusion surgery at level L4/5.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Obesity: An Independent Risk Factor for Complications in Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion? A Systematic Review.Global spine journal · 2022Article
- Anterior spine surgery for the treatment of complex spine pathology: a state-of-the-art review.Spine deformity · 2022Review
- Radiographic analysis of neuroforaminal and central canal decompression following lateral lumbar interbody fusion.North American Spine Society journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The incidence of lumbar fusion for the treatment of various degenerative lumbar spine diseases has increased dramatically over the last twenty years. Many lumbar fusion techniques have been developed and popularized, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) initially introduced in the 1930's, has become a common and widely accepted technique for lumbar fusions over the last decade offering several advantages over standard posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). More recently, the lateral trans-psoas approach termed extreme, direct or lateral lumbar interbody fusion (XLIF, DLIF, LLIF) is gaining widespread popularity. The aim of this paper is to compare the approaches, advantages and disadvantages of ALIF and XLIF for L4/5 interbody fusion based on relevant literature.
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.