ArticleSpine surgery and related research2019
New Intramuscular Electromyographic Monitoring with a Probe in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery.
Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Expert Consensus on Clinical Application of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Results From a Modified Delphi Study.Global spine journal · 2023Article
- 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) surgical approach is minimally invasive and safely accesses the target region. Therefore, it is widely used in cases of lumbar spinal stenosis and spinal deformity. Intraoperative neuromonitoring is necessary to avoid nerve injury, whereas postoperative anterior thigh symptoms are not necessarily prevented. TECHNICAL NOTE: In our institute, 85 LLIF operations have been performed. The first 30 cases were excluded from the present study to avoid surgical learning curve effects; conventional monitoring was used in 30 cases, whereas a new method with a probe to monitor intramuscular potential was used in 25 other cases. Anterior thigh symptoms and motor deficits were assessed postoperatively. The location of the electromyographic threshold decrease was at the posterior part of the disc at L2-3, but at the anterior part at L4-5. Compared with conventional monitoring, the new intramuscular monitoring significantly decreased the prevalence of motor deficits of the iliopsoas at 1 day and 30 days; anterior thigh pain at 1 day, 30, and 90 days; and anterior thigh numbness at 30 and 90 days postoperatively.
conclusionsCompared with conventional monitoring, the new intramuscular monitoring with a less invasive probe may reduce anterior thigh symptoms.
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.