ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2019
Treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis by instrumented posterolateral versus instrumented posterolateral with transforaminal lumbar interbody single-level fusion.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of risk factors for reoperation after degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery.BMC surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Outcomes of surgical intervention for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparative analysis of different surgical fixation techniques.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2023Article
- Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Narrative Review.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2022Review
- Lumbar spine fusion outcomes using a cellular bone allograft with lineage-committed bone-forming cells in 96 patients.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
- Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis treated by posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) versus PLF with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PLF + TLIF). Studies of PLF versus PLF + TLIF have shown either equivalence or support for PLF + TLIF in lumbar spine surgery. Many are heterogeneous in the conditions treated, with few considering only spondylolisthesis of degenerative origin. Radiographic outcomes tend to favor PLF + TLIF, but this has not translated into better clinical outcomes.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study. Forty-nine patients undergoing single-level PLF and seventy patients undergoing single-level PLF + TLIF with two-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), implant cost, surgical data, and complications were analyzed.
resultsThere was no difference in ODI improvement at two-year follow-up between the cohorts (P=0.97). Dural tears were more common in the PLF cohort (P<0.01), but otherwise complication and reoperation rates were similar. Implant cost (P<0.01) and operative time (P=0.01) were higher in the PLF + TLIF cohort.
conclusionsThe addition of a TLIF to a PLF did not result in a functional improvement in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis as measured by the ODI.
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.