ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2023
Clinical, Radiographic and Fusion Comparison of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) stand-alone and OLIF with posterior pedicle screw fixation in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis.
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 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the Outcomes of Endoscopic Posterolateral Interbody Fusion and Lateral Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical and radiological outcomes of titanium cage versus polyetheretherketone cage in lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Differences in radiographic and clinical outcomes of different oblique lumbar interbody fusions for lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Anterior lumbar interbody fusion augmented with anterior screw fixation for the treatment of L5/S1 spondylolisthesis: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Determinants of lateral fusion in single-level oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective analysis of fusion patterns and clinical outcomes.Asian spine journal · 2026Article
- Comparison of clinical efficacy between endoscope-assisted oblique lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of clinical outcomes between unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and oblique lumbar interbody fusion with posterior percutaneous screw fixation in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Biomechanical insights into anterolateral vertebral screw fixation in osteoporotic spines: a comparative study of fixation methods and positions using porcine vertebrae.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Two minimally invasive fusion techniques for neurogenic claudication caused by degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a minimum 2-year follow-up study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Can zoledronic acid reduce the risk of cage subsidence after oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with bilateral pedicle screw fixation in the elderly population? A retrospective study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Risk factors for low back pain after oblique lumbar interbody fusion in patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study.Frontiers in surgery · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the outcomes and characteristics of oblique lumbar interbody fusion stand-alone (OLIF-SA) and OLIF with posterior pedicle screw fixation (OLIF-PPS) in the treatment of Grade I or Grade II degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween January 2019 and May 2022, 139 patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis were treated with OLIF-SA (n = 85) or OLIF-PPS (n = 54). The clinical and radiographic records were reviewed.
resultsThe clinical and radiographic outcomes were similar in both groups. The operative time and intraoperative blood loss in the OLIF-SA group were lower than those in the OLIF-PPS group (P < 0.05). However, the OLIF-PPS group had significantly better disc height (DH) and postoperative forward spondylolisthesis distance (FSD) improvement at 6 months (P < 0.05). The OLIF-PPS group had a significantly lower cage subsidence value than the OLIF-SA group (P < 0.05). Improvement of the lumbar lordotic angle (LA) and fusion segmental lordotic angle (FSA) in the OLIF-PPS group was significantly better than that in the OLIF-SA group (P < 0.05). In terms of fusion types, the OLIF-SA group tended to undergo fusion from the edge of the vertebral body. Fusion in the OLIF-PPS group began more often in the bone graft area of the central cage of the vertebral body. The fusion speed of the OLIF-SA group was faster than that of the OLIF-PPS group.
conclusionOLIF-SA has the advantages of a short operative time, less intraoperative blood loss, and reduced financial burden, while PPS has incomparable advantages in the reduction of spondylolisthesis, restoration of lumbar physiological curvature, and long-term maintenance of intervertebral DH. In addition, the SA group had a unique vertebral edge fusion method and faster fusion speed.
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.