ArticleBMC surgery2023
Effect of spinal-pelvic sagittal balance on the clinical outcomes after lumbar fusion surgery.
Article in BMC surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Full versus partial correction of pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch in lumbar fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Review
- Sagittal Alignment as a Determinant of Pain and Functional Recovery after Lumbar Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Spine surgery and related research · 2026Review
- Mid-term effects of posterior versus oblique lumbar interbody fusion on spinopelvic alignment and clinical outcomes in lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective comparative cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 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
- Reduction in Severe, Chronic Mid-Back Pain Following Correction of Sagittal Thoracic Spinal Alignment Using Chiropractic BioPhysicsHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Application of deformity principles in the management of spinal neoplasms: A Primer.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- Dynamic vs. Rigid: Transforming the Treatment Landscape for Multisegmental Lumbar Degeneration.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Surgical Management of Lower Back Pain: Is Optimizing Spinopelvic Alignment Beneficial for Patient Outcomes?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Biomechanical changes in females with poly cystic ovarian syndrome: a case-control study.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Plain Radiography: A Unique Component of Spinal Assessment and Predictive Health.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Radiographic Assessment of Spinopelvic Parameters in Asymptomatic Ethiopian Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.JB & JS open accessArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSpinal-pelvic sagittal balance is important for maintaining energy-efficient posture in normal and diseased states.Few reports to date have evaluated the effect of spinal-pelvic sagittal balance on clinical outcomes after lumbar interbody fusion in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD).
methodsA total of 303 patients treated with posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative disease from January 2012 to December 2019 were enrolled in this retrospective study according to the inclusion criteria. Preoperative and postoperative spinal-pelvic sagittal parameters including pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS) and lumbar lordosis (LL) of the patients were evaluated and compared. 163 patients whose postoperative PI-LL ≤ 10° were divided into the spinal-pelvic match group (Group M), while 140 patients were divided into the spinal-pelvic mismatch group (Group MM). Preoperative and postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back pain of both groups were compared.
resultsThere was no significant difference between the two groups in demographic and surgical data, except for blood loss in surgery. LL, PI, PT and SS of the patients at final follow-up were all statistically different from the preoperative values in the two groups(P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in LL, PI, PT and SS between the two groups before surgery. At the final follow-up, LL, PI and PT differed significantly between the two groups(P < 0.05). Compared with the preoperative results, ODI and VAS of low back in both groups decreased significantly at the final follow-up (P < 0.05). Significant differences in VAS and ODI were found between the two groups at the final follow-up (P < 0.05). The improvement rates of VAS and ODI of Group M are both significantly higher than Group MM. Regression analysis showed that age and spinal-pelvic match had significant effects on the improvement of patients' low back pain at the final follow-up.
conclusionslumbar interbody fusion can significantly improve the prognosis of patients with LDD. In terms of outcomes with an average follow-up time of more than 2 years, the spinal-pelvic match has a positive effect on patients' quality of life and the release of low back pain.
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.