ReviewCureus2018
Comparison of Decompression Alone Versus Decompression with Fusion for Stenotic Lumbar Spine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of wearable devices and objective gait analysis for the assessment and monitoring of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: systematic review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Pooled it
- Standalone interspinous process devices for lumbar spinal stenosis: a critical literature review.BMC surgery · 2026Review
- Decompression only versus decompression plus fusion for spinal canal stenosis of adjacent segment during primary single-segment lumbar fusion surgery.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 · 2025Article
- Incidence and Risk Factors of Sacroiliac Joint Pain Following Lumbar Surgery with and without Fusion in Patients with Spinal Stenosis and Low-Grade Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.Asian journal of neurosurgery · 2025Article
- Therapy Potential of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion 360 for Severe Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
- Evolving Role of Lumbar Decompression: A Narrative Review.International journal of spine surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Short-Term Patient Outcomes Using the Interlaminar Endoscopic Surgical System Ilessys® Delta System versus Bilateral Laminotomy: A Single-Center Study of 80 Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
- Article
- Clinical Outcomes with and without Adherence to Evidence-Based Medicine Guidelines for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Fusion Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Effectiveness and safety of decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Decompression Using Minimally Invasive Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Associated with Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Review.Pain and therapy · 2021Review
- Percutaneous endoscopic unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression under 3D real-time image-guided navigation for spinal stenosis in degenerative lumbar kyphoscoliosis patients: an innovative preliminary study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
- Development of Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Healthy Life: To Provide Spine Care for Better, for Worse, for Richer, for Poorer, in Sickness and in Health.Neurospine · 2020Article
- Article
- An Algorithmic Approach to Treating Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: An Evidenced-Based Approach.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2019Review
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The first line of treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis (with or without lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis) involves conservative options such as anti-inflammatory drugs and analgesics. Approximately, 10%-15% of patients require surgery. Surgical treatment aims to decompress the spinal canal and dural sac from degenerative bony and ligamentous overgrowth. Different studies have given conflicting results. The aim of our study is to clear the confusion by comparing two surgical techniques. This meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A literature search was conducted of the Ovid Embase, Scopus, Pubmed, Ovid Medline, Google Scholar, and Cochrane library databases. A quality and risk of bias assessment was also done. The analysis was done using Revman software (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014, Copenhagen, Denmark). A total of 76 studies were extracted from the literature search and 29 studies with relevant information were shortlisted. Nine studies were included in the meta-analysis after a quality assessment and eligibility. Fusion with decompression surgery was found to be a better technique when compared to decompression alone for spinal stenosis in terms of the Oswestry Disability index and the visual analog pain scale for back and leg pain. On the basis of the meta-analysis of the recent medical literature, the authors concluded that decompression with fusion is a 3.5-times better surgical technique than decompression alone for spinal stenosis.
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.