ReviewOperative Orthopadie und Traumatologie2020
[Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion].
Review in Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie, 2020. 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.
- Different lumbar fusion techniques for lumbar spinal stenosis: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.BMC surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical efficacy of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion via bilateral channel for lumbar degenerative disease.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Correlation and risk factor analysis of multifidus muscle atrophy in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Minimally Invasive Surgery for Managing Grade IV and V Spondylolisthesis.Asian journal of neurosurgery · 2023Review
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveInstrumented fusion of lumbar motion segments using a minimally invasive technique. INDICATIONS: Degenerative disc disease, segmental degeneration, degenerative spondylolisthesis, isthmic spondylolisthesis, pseudarthrosis, other spinal lumbar instabilities, disc prolapse, revision for failed back surgery syndrome, unilateral neuroforaminal stenosis, facet joint arthrosis. CONTRAINDICATIONS: High-grade spondylolisthesis (Meyerding grades III/IV, spondyloptosis), bilateral nerve root compression, vertebral fractures, tumors, high-grade spinal instabilities, primary spinal deformities, multilevel pathologies. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: Ipsilateral minimally invasive approach using a self-retaining tubular retractor system, partial or complete facetectomy, insertion of pedicle screws, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cage insertion preserving nerve roots, fusion, contralateral insertion of pedicle screws using a minimally invasive or percutaneous technique. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: Mobilization with physiotherapy, followed by standing plain x‑ray examinations, clinical and radiological follow-up at 6-12 weeks and 1 year postoperatively.
resultsFusion rates >90%, comparable to open TLIF. Complication rates lower than open TLIF. Shorter radiation exposure during surgery, lower blood loss. Less surgical trauma leads to shorter hospitalization time and earlier return-to-work. Oswestry Disability index (ODI) scores and visual analog scale (VAS) scores significantly decreased.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32447419What 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.