Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39017731›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2024

Cyclic testing of standalone ALIF versus TLIF in lumbosacral spines of low bone mineral density: an ex vivo biomechanical study.

Alina Jacob, Maximilian Heumann, Ivan Zderic, Peter Varga, Nicolas Ion, Bogdan Bocea, Daniel Haschtmann, Tamas Fekete, Christian Rainer Wirtz, R Geoff Richards and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

12 authors.

Alina JacobBiomedical Department, AO Research Institute Davos, Davos, Switzerland. alinajacob20.04@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7241-741X
Maximilian HeumannBiomedical Department, AO Research Institute Davos, Davos, Switzerland.
Ivan ZdericBiomedical Department, AO Research Institute Davos, Davos, Switzerland.
Peter VargaBiomedical Department, AO Research Institute Davos, Davos, Switzerland.
Nicolas IonFaculty of Medicine Sibiu, Lucian Blaga University, Sibiu, Romania.
Bogdan BoceaFaculty of Medicine Sibiu, Lucian Blaga University, Sibiu, Romania.
Daniel HaschtmannDepartment of Spine Surgery, Schulthess Clinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Tamas FeketeDepartment of Spine Surgery, Schulthess Clinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Christian Rainer WirtzDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
R Geoff RichardsBiomedical Department, AO Research Institute Davos, Davos, Switzerland.
Boyko GueorguievBiomedical Department, AO Research Institute Davos, Davos, Switzerland.
Markus LoiblDepartment of Spine Surgery, Schulthess Clinic, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeScrewed anterior lumbar interbody fusion (SALIF) alleviates the need for supplemental posterior fixation leading to reduction of perioperative morbidity. Specifically, elderly and multimorbid patients would benefit from shorter operative time and faster recovery but tend to have low bone mineral density (BMD). The current study aimed to compare loosening, defined as increase of ROM and NZ, of SALIF versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) under cyclic loading in cadaveric spines with reduced BMD.

methodsTwelve human spines (L4-S2; 6 male 6 female donors; age 70.6 ± 19.6; trabecular BMD of L5 84.2 ± 24.4 mgHA/cm

resultsROM of the SALIF specimens increased significantly in all loading directions (p ≤ 0.041), except for left AR (p = 0.053), whereas for TLIF it increased significantly in left LB (p = 0.033) and Flex (p = 0.015). NZ of SALIF showed increase in Flex-Ext and LB, whereas NZ of TLIF did not increase significantly in any motion direction.

conclusionsAxial compression loading caused loosening of SALIF in Flex-Ext and LB, but not TLIF at L5/S1 in low BMD specimens. Nevertheless, Post-cyclic ROM and NZ of SALIF is comparable to TLIF. This suggests that, neither construct is optimal for the use in patients with reduced BMD.

Indexed as

Bone DensityLumbar VertebraeRange of Motion, ArticularSpinal FusionAgedAged, 80 and overBiomechanical PhenomenaCadaverFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSacrumAnterior lumbar interbody fusionBiomechanicsLumbosacral spineOsteoporosisTransforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Identifiers

PMID39017731

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.