ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2023
Comparison of the total and hidden blood loss in patients undergoing single-level open and unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective case control study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Total and Hidden Blood Loss in Biportal Endoscopic Versus Tubular-Based Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2026Article
- Hidden blood loss estimation using perioperative hemoglobin drop: agreement with the Sehat formula.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Hidden Blood Loss in Biportal Endoscopic Versus Traditional Open Spine Surgery: A Retrospective Comparative Study of Risk Factors and Clinical Relevance.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Advancements in unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion: a narrative review.European journal of medical research · 2026Review
- Effect of preoperative tranexamic acid on hidden blood loss and C-reactive protein in patients undergoing Delta-channel endoscopic lumbar discectomy: a retrospective case-control study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Biportal endoscopic versus conventional open spine surgery for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta‑analysis.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- Transfacet transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TF-TLIF) results in greater change in spondylolisthesis and posterior disc height compared to percutaneous TLIF (Perc-TLIF) or minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF): a retrospective study.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Early-stage lumbar paraspinal muscle injury: endoscopic versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective comparative analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Utilizing MRI and CT to identify risk factors associated with cage subsidence.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a retrospective analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Clinical comparison of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar vs. unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A systematic review of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery with interbody fusion.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- Comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar fusion and modified minimally invasive tubular lumbar fusion for lumbar disc herniation: a two-year retrospective study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Article
- Risk factors for hidden blood loss in unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion : a single-center retrospective study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to compare total blood loss (TBL) and hidden blood loss (HBL) in patients undergoing single-level open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (O-TLIF) and unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF).
methodsA total of 53 patients who underwent ULIF and 53 patients who underwent O-TLIF from March 2020 to July 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The Nadler's formula was employed to estimate the patient's blood volume (PBV), Gross's formula to estimate TBL, and Sehat's formula to estimate HBL. The obtained data were then analyzed with independent t test, chi-squared test, and analysis of covariance.
resultsTBL and measured blood loss (MBL) in ULIF group (326.86 ± 223.45 ml, 99.00 ± 72.81 ml) was significantly lower than O-TLIF group (427.97 ± 280.52 ml, 270.66 ± 102.34 ml). Nevertheless, the HBL in ULIF group was higher than that in O-TLIF group (227.86 ± 221.75 ml vs 157.31 ± 268.08 ml), however this was not statistically significant (p = 0.143). The HBL was 69.71 ± 23.72% of TBL in ULIF group and 36.76 ± 18.79% of TBL in O-TLIF group. Patients in ULIF group had lower TBL and MBL, shorter duration of drainage, lower postoperative anemia, and shorter postoperative hospital stay compared to those in O-TLIF group.
conclusionsPerioperative HBL should not be neglected in patients undergoing ULIF or O-TILF, as it accounts for a large percentage of TBL in both groups. ULIF is associated with lower TBL and MBL, postoperative anemia, shorter postoperative hospital stays compared with O-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.