Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34011192›Full record

ArticleGlobal spine journal2022

Indirect Lumbar Decompression Combined With or Without Additional Direct Posterior Decompression: A Systematic Review.

Mustfa K Manzur, Andre M Samuel, Kyle W Morse, Karim A Shafi, Bridget Jivanelli Gatto, Catherine Himo Gang, Sheeraz A Qureshi, Sravisht Iyer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global spine journal, 2022. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Disparity between early radiographic decompression and one-year patient satisfaction after single-level LLIF: proposal of the structural improvement score (SIS) and QOL improvement score (QIS).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 · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mustfa K ManzurSidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1789-3189
Andre M SamuelHospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Kyle W MorseHospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9136-8078
Karim A ShafiHospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6695-5593
Bridget Jivanelli GattoThe Kim Barrett Memorial Library, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8707-4859
Catherine Himo GangHospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Sheeraz A QureshiHospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Sravisht IyerHospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Hospital for Special Surgery · USThomas Jefferson University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designSystematic review.

objectiveIndirect decompression via lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) can ameliorate central and foraminal lumbar stenosis. In severe central stenosis, additional posterior direct decompression is utilized. The aim of this review is to synthesize existing literature on these 2 techniques and identify significant differences in outcomes between isolated indirect decompression via LLIF and combined indirect decompression supplemented with direct posterior decompression.

methodsA database search algorithm was utilized to query MEDLINE, COCHRANE, and EMBASE to identify literature reporting adult decompression study groups that involved an oblique or lateral fusion approach through September 2020. Improvement in outcomes measures and complication rates were pooled and tested for significance.

resultsA total of 110 publications were assessed with 15 studies meeting inclusion criteria, including 557 patients and 1008 levels. Mean age was 63.1 years with BMI of 27.5 kg/m

conclusionsPrior studies of both indirect decompression as well as combined indirect and direct decompression of lumbar spine stenosis are limited by small samples, heterogeneous populations, and lack of direct comparisons. Both procedures result in improved function and pain postoperatively with direct decompression restoring more lordosis in patients with worse preoperative alignment.

Indexed as

direct decompressionindirect decompressionlateral approachposterior instrumentationspine fusionsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34011192
PMCPMC9344527
OpenAlexW3161007334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.