ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2023
Three-dimensional High-definition Exoscope in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exoscope versus microscope in spine surgery: A meta-analysis based on procedure-specific subgroup analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- Exoscope-Assisted Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review From Basic to Complex Pathologies.Cureus · 2025Review
- Exoscope-assisted spine surgery: Current applications and future directions-A short review.World neurosurgery: X · 2025Review
- Comparison of surgical exoscope versus operating microscope in spine surgery: A Surgeon's perspective.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Endoscopic and exoscopic surgery for brain tumors.International journal of clinical oncology · 2024Review
- High-Definition 4K-3D Exoscope in Spine Surgery: A Single-Center Experience and Review of the Literature.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Exoscope-assisted spine surgery: Current applications and future directions.World neurosurgery: X · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe operative microscope (OM) has revolutionized the field of modern spine surgery, however, it remains limited by several drawbacks. Recently, the exoscope (EX) system has been designed to assistant spine surgery. It provides a three-dimensional (3D) high-definition (HD) operative experience and becomes an alternative to the OM. The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes, advantages and limitations of EX-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (EMIS-TLIF) and OM-assisted MIS-TLIF (OMIS-TLIF).
methodsThe clinical outcomes were assessed in 47 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD) who underwent MIS-TLIF assisted with the OM or EX between January 2019 and September 2020. A total of 22 were treated with EMIS-TLIF, and 25 received OMIS-TLIF. Perioperative parameters (including sex, age, number of fusion levels and body mass index), perioperative parameters (operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, postoperative hospitalization stay, and duration of follow-up), visual analogue scale (VAS) of back pain, VAS of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores and clinical outcomes were assessed and compared. Image quality, handling of equipment, ergonomics, 3D glasses and educational usefulness were scored according to a questionnaire.
resultsOperation time in the OMIS-TLIF group (121.92 ± 16.92 min) was significantly increased compared with that in the EMIS-TLIF group (111.00 ± 19.87 min) (P < 0.05). The VAS of the back pain and ODI scores in the EMIS-TLIF group were significantly lower compared with the OMIS-TLIF group at 1 week postoperatively (P < 0.05). The good-excellent outcomes rate was 90.91% in the EMIS-TLIF group and 88.00% in the OMIS-TLIF group, and there was no significant difference. A total of 44 visits completed the questionnaire. The results of the questionnaire showed that the EX has exhibited advantages regarding handing of equipment, ergonomics and educational usefulness, and comparable image quality as compared with the OM, however, operating surgeons complained uncomfortable sensation when wearing 3D glasses.
conclusionsThe EMIS-TLIF was a safe and effective procedure in the management of LDD as compared with the OMIS-LIF. Meanwhile, EMIS-TLIF might resulted in a short operation time.
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.