SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2022
Surgical Treatments for Lumbar Spine Diseases (TLIF vs. Other Surgical Techniques): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and radiological outcomes of titanium cage versus polyetheretherketone cage in lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Bilateral decompression during unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion significantly reduces contralateral radiculopathy: A retrospective analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Article
- Comparative analysis of acute postoperative pain and opioid use between lateral transpsoas, anterior, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- Short- and Mid-Term Outcomes Following ALIF and TLIF in L5-S1 Isthmic Spondylolisthesis Patients.International journal of spine surgery · 2025Article
- Cyclic testing of standalone ALIF versus TLIF in lumbosacral spines of low bone mineral density: an ex vivo biomechanical study.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 · 2024Article
- A New Neuroanesthetic Protocol of Rendering Specialized Care in Treating Degenerative Lumbar Spine Diseases in High-Risk Patients: Prospective Analysis of the Results.Sovremennye tekhnologii v meditsine · 2024Article
- Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic surgery (PTES) and mini-incision L5/S1 OLIF with a self-lock cage for the surgical treatment of L5 spondylolisthesis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Analysis of risk factors for contralateral symptomatic foraminal stenosis after unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.International orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Effect of preoperative contralateral foramen stenosis on contralateral root symptoms after unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a ambispective cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Application of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Combined with Bridge-Locking Cage in Adjacent Segment Disease After Lumbar Fusion.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Article
- Management of lumbar spondylolisthesis: A retrospective analysis of posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
- Does indirect decompression by oblique lateral interbody fusion produce similar clinical and radiological outcomes to direct decompression by open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.Journal of neurosciences in rural practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study is to compare fusion rate, clinical outcomes, complications among transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and other techniques for lumbar spine diseases. Design: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis. Data Sources: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases were searched from January 2013 through December 2019. Eligibility Criteria for Selecting Studies: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compare lumbar interbody fusion with posterolateral fusion (PLF) and/or other lumbar interbody fusion were included for the review. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent reviewers extracted relevant data and assessed the risk of bias. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Pooled risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval of fusion rate, clinical outcomes, and complications in TLIF and other techniques for lumbar spinal diseases. Results: Of 3,682 potential studies, 15 RCTs (915 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to other surgical techniques, TLIF had slightly lower fusion rate [RR = 0.84 (95% CI = 0.72-0.97), Conclusions: Besides fusion rate at 1-year follow-up and operative time, TLIF has a similar fusion rate, clinical outcomes, parameters concerning operation and complications to no fusion, PLF, and other interbody fusion (PLIF, ALIF, XLIF). Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42020186858.
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.