ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022
Can oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) create more lumbosacral lordosis in lumbar spine surgery than minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF)?
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fusion rate and complications of oblique lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Influence of prone, supine, and lateral positions during spine surgery on vascular, abdominal, and postural anatomy: a comprehensive review and Bayesian meta-analysis.European journal of medical research · 2025Review
- A retrospective cohort study comparing perioperative clinical outcomes and radiographic results between patients undergoing TLIF and OLIF surgeries.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the differences in the correction effect for lumbosacral lordosis and clinical outcomes between OLIF with/without posterior pedicle screw fixation (PSF) and MIS-TLIF through a retrospective cohort study. Method: There were 98 consecutive patients originally enrolled for the study, but 15 patients were excluded due to intraoperative endplate injury or osteotomy performed for severe spinal deformity. Thus, 83 patients included in this study (36 males and 47 females, mean age 65.8 years) underwent single to three-segment OLIF (including OLIF + PSF and OLIF Standalone) or MIS-TLIF surgery from 2016 to 2018. The operation time, bleeding and blood transfusion, fusion rate, complication, pre-and postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were evaluated. In addition, radiological parameters including lumbosacral lordosis (LL), fused segment lordosis (FSL), anterior disc height (ADH) and posterior disc height (PDH) were measured. The clinical outcomes, LL, FSL, ADH and PDH restored and were compared between the OLIF group, OLIF subgroups and MIS-TLIF group. Results: The average operation time and intraoperative bleeding were significantly less in the OLIF group than in the MIS-TLIF group (163 ± 68 vs. 233 ± 79 min, 116 ± 148 vs. 434 ± 201 ml Conclusion: OLIF and MIS-TLIF are both safe and effective procedures, capable of restoring lumbosacral lordosis and disc height partly. Combined with PSF, OLIF can achieve a better correction effect of lumbosacral lordosis than MIS-TLIF.
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.