ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2022
Do Radiographic Results of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Vary with Cage Position in Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Diseases?
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unilateral Endo-LIF in treating central lumbar spinal stenosis.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Preoperative Alignment and Interbody Cage Design Influence Radiographic Outcomes Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical and spinopelvic outcomes of Transforaminal versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion at L5-S1: a short-term ambispective cohort study.Brain & spine · 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
- Comparison of capsule and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in cauda equina syndrome with retention: a 24-month follow-up study.European journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Effects of Cage Implantation Depth on Sagittal Parameters and Functional Outcomes in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of L4-L5 Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Article
- Anterior Placement of Cages in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Obtaining Good Lumbar Lordosis Formation.Spine surgery and related research · 2024Article
- Electroactive Spinal Instrumentation for Targeted Osteogenesis and Spine Fusion: A Computational Study.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Radiographic outcomes and subsidence rate in hyperlordotic versus standard lordotic interbody spacers in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
- The impact of cage position, radiographic parameters, and hounsfield units on subsidence rate after one to three level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate whether the radiographic results are affected by cage position in single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).
methodBetween January 2016 and June 2018, 130 patients (62 males and 68 females, average age: 55.28 ± 10.11 years) who underwent single-level TLIF were analyzed retrospectively. Standing lateral radiographs of the lumbar spine were collected and evaluated preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the time of last follow-up. Cage position in the fused segment was recorded using a central point ratio (CPR), which indicated the cage position. CPR is calculated by dividing the distance between the cage center point and the posterior extent of the superior endplate of the inferior vertebra by the length of the superior endplate of the inferior vertebra. Based on cage positions, the patients were divided into three groups: Anterior Group (n = 38); Middle Group (n = 68); and Posterior Group (n = 24). Segmental lumbar lordosis (SLL), foraminal height (FH), posterior disc height (PDH), and anterior disc height (ADH) were evaluated. A subanalysis was also performed on cage height within each group.
resultsThe average follow-up time of the patients was 35.20 ± 4.43 months. The mean values of CPR in Anterior Group, Middle Group, and Posterior Group were 0.64, 0.51, and 0.37, respectively. The FH, PDH, and ADH were significantly increased after TLIF in all groups (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in increase of SLL in Anterior Group (4.4°) and Middle Group (3.0°), but not in Posterior Group (0.3°). Furthermore, in the comparison of the three groups, the increase of SLL, FH, and PDH was statistically different (P < 0.05), while not for ADH (P > 0.05). The significant correlations in surgery were: CPR and ΔSLL (r = 0.584, P < 0.001), CPR and ΔFH (r = -0.411, P < 0.001), and CPR and ΔPDH (r = -0.457, P < 0.001). However, ADH had a positive correlation with cage height when the cage was located in anterior and middle of the endplate. Moreover, cage height had a positive correlation with SLL when the cage was located anteriorly and had a negative correlation with SLL when the cage was located posteriorly. FH and PDH both had a positive correlation with cage height in any cage position.
conclusionThe cage located in different positions has different effects on radiographic results in single-level TLIF. A thicker cage located anteriorly will gain maximum SLL and avoid the reduction of FH and PDH.
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.