Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37119422›Full record

SynthesisNeurosurgical review2023

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yun-Lu Wang, Xi-Yong Li, Lun Liu, Song-Feng Li, Peng-Fei Han, Xiao-Dong Li

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. OralFrontiers in surgery · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yun-Lu WangDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Second People's Hospital of Changzhi City, Changzhi, People's Republic of China.
Xi-Yong LiGraduate School, Changzhi Medical College, Changzhi, People's Republic of China.
Lun LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Second People's Hospital of Changzhi City, Changzhi, People's Republic of China.
Song-Feng LiGraduate School, Changzhi Medical College, Changzhi, People's Republic of China.
Peng-Fei HanDepartment of Orthopaedics, Heping Hospital Affiliated to Changzhi Medical College, Changzhi, People's Republic of China. 18003551149@163.com.
Xiao-Dong LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Second People's Hospital of Changzhi City, Changzhi, People's Republic of China. drlxd@sina.com.

Funding

Scientific Research Project of Health Commission of Shanxi Province 2020133
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This meta-analysis compared the efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. A computer search for the published literature on OLIF and MIS-TLIF for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and other databases was performed, from which 522 related articles were retrieved and 13 were finally included. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the included studies and analyzed them using RevMan 5.4. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane systematic analysis and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analysis showed that the blood loss [95% confidence intervals (CI) (- 121.01, - 54.56), [Formula: see text]], hospital stay [95% CI (- 1.98, - 0.85), [Formula: see text]], postoperative fusion rate [95%CI (1.04, 3.60), [Formula: see text]], postoperative disc height [95% CI (0.50, 3.63), [Formula: see text]], and postoperative foraminal height [95% CI (0.96, 4.13), [Formula: see text]] were all better in the OLIF group; however, the complication rates were significantly lower in the MIS-TLIF group [95% CI (1.01, 2.06), [Formula: see text]]. However, there were no significant differences between the two in terms of surgery time, patient satisfaction, or postoperative functional scores. The OLIF group had the advantages of lower blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, a higher postoperative fusion rate, and better recovery of the disc and foraminal heights, whereas MIS-TLIF had a relatively lower complication rate.

Indexed as

Lumbar VertebraeSpinal FusionHumansLumbosacral RegionMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPatient SatisfactionRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeDegenerative disease of the lumbar spineMeta-analysisMinimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusionOblique lumbar interbody fusionTreatment

Identifiers

PMID37119422
PMCPMC10148790

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.