ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2022
When to Consider Stand-Alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Is There a Role for a Comeback With New Implants?
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of instrumented and stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Pooled it
- Preclinical evaluation of a 3D-printed porous stand-alone interbody cage for cervical fusion in a sheep model.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Joint International SILACO, SICCMII, ISASS Symposium as a Model for a Collaborative Framework to Create Literature on Advances in Spine Surgery, Patient Care, and Policy.International journal of spine surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo perform a comprehensive review of the literature about the role of stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF).
methodsA MEDLINE review was conducted including studies about stand-alone LLIF for any condition. The opinions of the authors were also considered. Studies that included biomechanical, cadaveric, or clinical aspects of stand-alone cages were revised to obtain data about the pros, cons, and limitations of the technique. Comparative studies with 360° (lateral + posterior) fusions were also analyzed.
resultsA total of 36 studies were identified. After reviewing the abstracts, 18 full articles of interest for the objective of this review were analyzed. Recommendations based on the literature were made. Although most of the recommendations in the literature were about augmentation with pedicle screws, there may be a role for stand-alone LLIF in some particular cases. Specific technical aspects should be considered to reduce the failure rate.
conclusionAlthough there might be some specific indications for stand-alone LLIF, it should be considered an exception rather than the rule. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:
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.