ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2022
Biomechanical comparison of different interspinous process devices in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: 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 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Standalone interspinous process devices for lumbar spinal stenosis: a critical literature review.BMC surgery · 2026Review
- The renewed role of interspinous devices: the InSpan system-a narrative review on surgical indications.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Review
- Biomechanical analysis of the interlaminar dynamic stabilization system (IntraSPINE) in unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for huge lumbar disc herniation: a finite element study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Comparison of Coflex dynamic stabilization with bacfuse static stabilization for lumbar degenerative disease.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Computational analysis of L4-L5 interspinous process devices and interbody fusion spacers using ceramic and polymeric materials via finite element modeling and artificial intelligence.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of clinical efficacy and radiological findings of interspinous dynamic stabilization system versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Microdiscectomy, Interspinous Device Implantation, and Full-Endoscopic Discectomy for Simple Lumbar Disc Herniation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Perspective: Efficacy and outcomes for different lumbar interspinous devices (ISD) vs. open surgery to treat lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).Surgical neurology international · 2024Review
- Biomechanical characteristics of a novel interspinous distraction fusion device in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common disease among elderly individuals, and surgery is an effective treatment. The development of minimally invasive surgical techniques, such as the lumbar interspinous process device (IPD), has provided patients with more surgical options.
objectiveTo investigate the biomechanical properties of different IPDs, including BacFuse, X-Stop and Coflex, in the treatment of LSS.
methodsBased on the computed tomography images of a patient with LSS, four finite element (FE) models of L3-S5 were created in this study. The FE models included a surgical model of the intact lumbar spine and surgical models of the lumbar IPDs BacFuse, X-Stop, and Coflex. After validating the models, they were simulated for four physiological motions: flexion, extension, lateral bending and axial rotation, and range of motion (ROM). Stress distribution of discs and facet joints in each segment, stress distribution of the spinous process in the operated section, and stress distribution of the internal fixation were compared and analysed.
resultsCompared to the model of the intact lumbar spine, the other three models showed a decrease in ROM and disc and facet joint stresses in the surgical segment during movement and an increase in ROM and disc and facet joint stresses in the adjacent segments. These effects were greater for the proximal adjacent segment with BacFuse and more pronounced for the distal adjacent segment with Coflex, while X-Stop had the greatest stress effect on the spinous process in the surgical segment.
conclusionBacFuse, Coflex and X-Stop could all be implemented to effectively reduce extension and disc and facet joint stresses, but they also increase the ROM and disc and facet joint stresses in adjacent segments, which may cause degeneration.
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.