Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31894472›Full record

SynthesisMusculoskeletal surgery2020

Fusion rate and influence of surgery-related factors in lumbar interbody arthrodesis for degenerative spine diseases: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

M Formica, D Vallerga, A Zanirato, L Cavagnaro, M Basso, S Divano, L Mosconi, E Quarto, G Siri, L Felli

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Musculoskeletal surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Adult spinal deformity surgery: posterior three-column osteotomies vs anterior lordotic cages with posterior fusion. Complications, clinical and radiological results. A systematic review of the literature.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 · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Titanium (Ti) cages may be superior to polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages in lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and radiological outcomes of spinal interbody fusions using Ti versus PEEK cages.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 · 2021
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Additional internal fixation improves fusion rate of anterior spondylodesis in thoracic and lumbar spine fractures - a CT-based analysis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. OralFrontiers in surgery · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M FormicaClinica Ortopedica, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy.
D VallergaClinica Ortopedica, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy. davide.vallerga@gmail.com.
A ZaniratoClinica Ortopedica, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy.
L CavagnaroClinica Ortopedica, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy.
M BassoClinica Ortopedica, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy.
S DivanoClinica Ortopedica, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy.
L MosconiClinica Ortopedica, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy.
E QuartoClinica Ortopedica, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy.
G SiriDepartment of Mathematics, University of Genoa, Via Dodecaneso 35, 16146, Genoa, GE, Italy.
L FelliClinica Ortopedica, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy.
Ospedale Policlinico San Martino · ITUniversity of Genoa · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this meta-analysis and systematic review is to summarize and critically analyze the influence of surgery-related factors in lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spine diseases. A systematic review of the literature was carried out with a primary search being performed on Medline through PubMed. The 2009 PRISMA flowchart and checklist were taken into account. Sixty-seven articles were included in the analysis: 48 studies were level IV of evidence, whereas 19 were level III. All interbody fusion techniques analyzed have proved to reach a good fusion rate. An overall mean fusion rate of 93% (95% CI 92-95%, p < 0.001) was estimated pooling the selected studies. The influence of sagittal parameters and cages features in fusion rate was not clear. Autograft is considered the gold standard material. The use of synthetic bone substitutes and biological factors alone or combined with bone graft have shown conflicting results. Low level of evidence studies and high heterogeneity (χ

Indexed as

Spinal FusionHumansLumbar VertebraeSpinal DiseasesTreatment OutcomeDegenerative lumbar spinal surgeryFusion rateLumbar interbody fusionNon-unionOutcomeRisk factors

Identifiers

PMID31894472
OpenAlexW2997171121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.