Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29879783›Full record

ArticleAsian spine journal2018

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Modified Mini-Open and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparative Study.

Sudhir Ganesan, Vignesh Jayabalan, Venkatesh Kumar, Karthik Kailash

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Asian spine journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. [Comparative study on effectiveness of percutaneous endoscopic and Wiltse-approach transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2022
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. [Comparison of intervertebral height and lordosis of fusion segment between open- and minimally invasive-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

4 authors.

Sudhir GanesanDepartment of Spine Surgery, Sri Ramachandra Medical University, Chennai, India.
Vignesh JayabalanDepartment of Spine Surgery, Sri Ramachandra Medical University, Chennai, India.
Venkatesh KumarDepartment of Spine Surgery, Sri Ramachandra Medical University, Chennai, India.
Karthik KailashDepartment of Spine Surgery, Sri Ramachandra Medical University, Chennai, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designRetrospective cohort study. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of modified mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (modMOTLIF) and open TLIF (OTLIF). OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MTLIF) is associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and less pain. However, it has concerns like increased radiation exposure, steep learning curve, and instrumentation cost. We modified the MTLIF technique by direct freehand insertion of pedicle screws using stab incisions without tubular retractors.

methodsThe study included 24 patients in the modMOTLIF group and 27 patients in the OTLIF group. The average follow-up period was 25.6 months. Clinical outcomes were measured using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Serial X-rays were acquired at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months to assess the union and presence of instability. We also compared blood loss and length of hospital stay in both groups.

resultsAll patients showed progressive improvement in VAS and ODI scores. No differences were observed in the preoperative and postoperative ODI and VAS leg scores between the groups. The immediate postoperative VAS back score was significantly higher in the OTLIF group than in the modMOTLIF group; however, no difference was observed at 1 and 2 years. Radiological analysis showed nonunion in one and two patients in the OTLIF and modMOTLIF groups, respectively. The average blood loss was 63 mL in the mod-MOTLIF group and 254 mL in the OTLIF group. The mean hospital stay was 3 days for the modMOTLIF group and 5 days for the OTLIF group.

conclusionsmodMOTLIF was associated with reduced blood loss and shorter hospital stay compared with OTLIF. No significant differences were observed in the clinical and radiological outcomes between the groups after 2 years despite reduced back pain in the immediate postoperative period in patients who underwent modMOTLIF.

Indexed as

Modified mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusionOpen transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Identifiers

PMID29879783
PMCPMC6002170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.