ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2022
May the midline lumbar interbody fusion (MIDLIF) prevent the early radiographic adjacent segment degeneration? A minimum 3-year follow-up comparative study of MIDLIF in L4/5 with cortical bone trajectory screw versus traditional pedicle screw fixation.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative effectiveness of cortical bone trajectory screws and pedicle screws in the treatment of adjacent segment degeneration after lumbar fusion surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Pooled it
- Low-Profile Posterior Lumbar Fusion Combined With Proximal Interlaminar Coflex Dynamic Fixation for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Comparative Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Hidden blood loss in robot-assisted vs. conventional midline lumbar interbody fusion: a single-center propensity-score-matched cohort study.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- The Safety and Effectiveness of Multi-Segment Cortical Bone Trajectory Screws in Adult Degenerative Scoliosis with Stenosis Among the Elderly: Minimum 5-year Follow-up Study.Clinical interventions in aging · 2025Article
- Expert consensus on the clinical application of cortical bone trajectory for lumbar pedicle screws: results from a modified Delphi study.Asian spine journal · 2024Article
- Low profile posterior lumbar-sacral interbody fusion for lumbosacral degenerative diseases: a technical note.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- The role of oxidative stress in intervertebral disc cellular senescence.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective cohort study.
objectiveTo compare the early radiographic adjacent segment degeneration (R-ASD) and regional lumbar sagittal alignment after midline lumbar interbody fusion (MIDLIF) with cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw fixation (CBT-MIDLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with the traditional pedicle screw fixation (PS-PLIF) during long-term follow-up.
methodsAll patients who underwent CBT-MIDLIF or PS-PLIF were identified by a retrospective consecutive case review. Radiographic parameters in cephalad adjacent segment (L3/4), including intervertebral space height (ISH), foraminal height (FH), foraminal width (FW), range of motion were assessed. Lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral slope (SS), L4-L5 Cobb angle, Cobb angle of the intervertebral space at L4-L5, and height of the anterior and posterior edges of the intervertebral space at L4-L5, were measured and compared on preoperative, postoperative, and 3-year follow-up radiographic evaluation.
resultsSeventy-four patients underwent CBT-MIDLIF (CBT-MIDLIF group) and 114 patients underwent conventional PS-PLIF (PS-PLIF group). ISH, FH and FW were significantly smaller at 6-month follow-up than before operation with PS-PLIF (p < 0.001) but showed no significant changes with CBT-MIDLIF (p > 0.05). At the last follow-up, the changes in cephalad R-ASD parameters were more remarkable after PS-PLIF than after CBT-MIDLIF (p < 0.01). LL and SS were significant larger at the last follow-up than before operation in both groups (p < 0.001). Regarding long-term outcomes, the symptoms caused by degenerative spinal disorders significantly improved in both groups (p < 0.01).
conclusionCBT-MIDLIF had less radiographic degeneration in the adjacent segment than PS-PLIF at 3-year follow-up. The lumbar sagittal alignment could be improved significantly and the surgical outcomes were satisfactory after either CBT-MIDLIF or PS-PLIF.
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.