Trial reportBioMed research international2019
Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Preliminary Report of Seven Cases with 12-Month Follow-Up.
Trial report in BioMed research international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of efficacy and safety between unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus uniportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion enhanced the recovery of patients with the lumbar degenerative disease compared with the conventional posterior procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Pooled it
- [Comparison of effectiveness between two endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion techniques and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-level lumbar degenerative disease].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Article
- Unilateral Endo-LIF in treating central lumbar spinal stenosis.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of learning curves and clinical efficacy of two endoscopic techniques for single segment lumbar degenerative disease.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of midterm outcomes between biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and oblique lumbar interbody fusion with lateral vertebral body screw fixation for single level spondylolisthesis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Comparison of the clinical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion through different surgical approaches: a retrospective study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Comparative Study between Full-Endoscopic Transforaminal Approach Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TF-LIF) Using PETLIF System and Minimally Invasive TLIF for Degenerative Lumbar Spine Disorders.Spine surgery and related research · 2025Article
- Hidden blood loss and risk factors after percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion microscopic safe operating area: a three-dimensional model study based on computed tomography imaging.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Early result of percutaneous full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative diseases: a retrospective study.Neurosurgical review · 2024Article
- Short-term and mid-term evaluation of three types of minimally invasive lumbar fusion surgery for treatment of L4/L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PETLIF): Current Techniques, Clinical Outcomes, and Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Full-Endoscopic versus Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2022Article
- Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic and open posterior lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of single-segmental lumbar degenerative diseases.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- Analysis of curative effect of percutaneous coaxial large channel endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Changes in paraspinal muscles and facet joints after percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: A 3-year follow-up.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Full Endoscopic Posterolateral Transarticular Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Transparent Plastic Working Tubes: Technical Note and Preliminary Clinical Results.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Frontiers in surgery · 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
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this study was to investigate the preliminary effectiveness of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PE-TLIF) for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).
methodsFrom September 2016 to June 2017, a series of seven patients consisting of six females and one male with an average age of 55.25 years (range 43-77 years) who were diagnosed with LSS were involved in this study. All patients were treated by PE-TLIF. During perioperative and follow-up period, demographic data, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria were evaluated and perioperative complications were documented.
resultsAll patients were followed up for more than 12 months, with an average follow-up time of 15 (range 12-21) months. The mean VAS of back pain was 7.43 (range 6-8) preoperatively and 0.86 (range 0-2) at the final follow-up. The mean VAS of leg pain was 6.14 (range 4-9) preoperatively and 0.71 (range 0-1) at the final follow-up. The mean ODI was 53.57% (range 38%-63%) preoperatively and 15.57% (range 5%-26%) at the final follow-up. In three-month follow-up, continuous bone trabeculae bridging between intervertebral bodies was seen in 3 cases, and the remaining 4 cases could identify continuous bone trabeculae bridging at 6-month follow-up, reaching the standard of spinal intervertebral fusion. At the final follow-up, 4 patients were rated as excellent (4/7) and 3 patients were rated as good (3/7) according to the modified MacNab criteria.
conclusionsOur study suggested that percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion could acquire satisfactory treatment effects for the patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, even for the patient who could not afford general anesthesia.
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.