ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2022
Oblique lateral interbody fusion combined with different internal fixations for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease: a finite element analysis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Biomechanical advantages of double-trajectory screws technique combined with multiple-rod constructs in lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy: a finite element analysis study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Does Anteroposterior Cage Position and Screw Orientation Influence Clinical/Radiographic Outcomes and Complications After Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Lateral Plate Fixation?Orthopedic research and reviews · 2026Article
- 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
- Finite Element Analysis of Biomechanical Assessment: Traditional Bilateral Pedicle Screw System vs. Novel Reverse Transdiscal Screw System for Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Changing rod stiffness to moderate stress of adjacent disc in oblique lumbar interbody fusion - a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Biomechanical insights into anterolateral vertebral screw fixation in osteoporotic spines: a comparative study of fixation methods and positions using porcine vertebrae.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Establishment and validation of a three-dimensional finite element model for degenerative lumbar scoliosis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Vascularized Iliac Crest Bone Graft for the Reconstruction of Anterior Vertebral Corpus Defects: A Literature Review and Cadaveric Feasibility Study.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Biomechanical impact of cortical bone vs. traditional pedicle screw trajectories: a finite element study on lumbar spinal instrumentation.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Biomechanical evaluation of oblique lateral interbody fusion with various fixation methods for degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a finite element analysis considering different bone densities.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- An in vitro biomechanical evaluation of integrated lateral plate combined with oblique lateral interbody fusion in different bone conditions.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Finite element analysis of biomechanical investigation on diverse internal fixation techniques in oblique lumbar interbody fusion.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Article
- Biomechanical assessment of anterior plate system, bilateral pedicle screw and transdiscal screw system for high-grade spondylolisthesis: a finite element study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Biomechanical differences between two different shapes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion cages on whether to add posterior internal fixation system: a finite element analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Comparative Biomechanical Analysis of Unilateral, Bilateral, and Lateral Pedicle Screw Implantation in Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Oblique lateral interbody fusion with internal fixations in the treatment for cross-segment degenerative lumbar spine disease (L2-3 and L4-5) finite element analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Biomechanical Analysis of Double-Level Oblique Lumbar Fusion with Different Types of Fixation: A Finite Element-Based Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Article
- Application of the cortical bone trajectory technique in posterior lumbar fixation.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about the biomechanical performance of different internal fixations in oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). Here, finite element (FE) analysis was used to describe the biomechanics of various internal fixations and compare and explore the stability of each fixation.
methodsCT scans of a patient with lumbar degenerative disease were performed, and the l3-S1 model was constructed using relevant software. The other five FE models were constructed by simulating the model operation and adding different related implants, including (1) an intact model, (2) a stand-alone (SA) model with no instrument, (3) a unilateral pedicle screw model (UPS), (4) a unilateral pedicle screw contralateral translaminar facet screw model (UPS-CTFS), (5) a bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) model, and (6) a cortical bone trajectory screw model (CBT). Various motion loads were set by FE software to simulate lumbar vertebral activity. The software was also used to extract the range of motion (ROM) of the surgical segment, CAGE and fixation stress in the different models.
resultsThe SA group had the greatest ROM and CAGE stress. The ROM of the BPS and UPS-CTFS was not significantly different among motion loadings. Compared with the other three models, the BPS model had lower internal fixation stress among loading conditions, and the CBT screw internal fixation had the highest stress among loads.
conclusionsThe BPS model provided the best biomechanical stability for OLIF. The SA model was relatively less stable. The UPS-CTFS group had reduced ROM in the fusion segments, but the stresses on the internal fixation and CAGE were relatively higher in the than in the BPS group; the CBT group had a lower flexion and extension ROM and higher rotation and lateral flexion ROM than the BPS group. The stability of the CBT group was poorer than that of the BPS and LPS-CTFS groups. The CAGE and internal fixation stress was greater in the CBT group.
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.