Observational studyMedicine2019
Comparison of intervertebral fusion rates of different bone graft materials in extreme lateral interbody fusion.
Observational study in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Application of nano-hydroxyapatite matrix graft in inter-vertebral fusion therapy: a meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Pooled it
- Totally endoscopic trans‑superior articular process lumbar interbody fusion: A case series on the development and preliminary evaluation of an innovative minimally invasive lumbar spine surgical technique.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2025Article
- Review
- Osteobiologics and Value-Based Care: Challenges and Opportunities.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Unique Characteristics of New Bone Formation Induced by Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Procedure.Spine surgery and related research · 2023Article
- Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Osteobiologics for Lumbar Fusion.Asian spine journal · 2022Article
- Comparison of Posterior Pedicle Screw Fixation and Lateral Fixation in the Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion in Lumbar Degenerative Disease Patients with Osteopenia or Osteoporosis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Article
- Efficacy for Whitlockite for Augmenting Spinal Fusion.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Lateral lumbar interbody fusion using a cellular allogeneic bone matrix in the treatment of symptomatic degenerative lumbar disc disease and lumbar spinal instability.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare imaging indicators and clinical effects of extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) using allogenic bone, autologous bone marrow + allogenic bone, and rhBMP-2 + allogenic bone as bone graft materials in the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases.This was a retrospective study of 93 patients with lumbar interbody fusion who underwent the extreme lateral approach from May 2016 to December 2017. According to the different bone graft materials, patients were divided into allogenic bone groups (group A, 31 cases), rhBMP-2 + allogenic bone (group B, 32 cases), and autologous bone marrow + allogenic bone (group C, 30 cases). There were no significant differences in gender, age, lesion segment, preoperative intervertebral space height, and preoperative Oswestry Dysfunction Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores among the 3 groups (P > .05). Intervertebral space height, bone graft fusion rate, and ODI and VAS scores were compared immediately after surgery, and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.All groups were followed up for 12 months. The intervertebral space height was significantly higher in the 3 groups immediately after surgery and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, in comparison to before surgery (P < .05). There was no significant difference in the intervertebral space height among the 3 groups immediately after surgery and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery (P > .05). The fusion rate of group B and C was higher than that of groups A at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery (P < .05). In the 3 groups, the VAS and ODI scores at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery were significantly improved compared with the preoperative scores (P < .05). The VAS and ODI scores in groups B and C were significantly higher than those in group A (P < .05), but there was no significant difference between groups B and C (P > .05).The rhBMP-2 + allograft bone combination had good clinical effects and high fusion rate in XLIF.
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.