ArticleScientific reports2024
Single-position oblique lumbar interbody fusion with navigation: improved efficiency and screw accuracy compared to dual-position with fluoroscopy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional Ureteral Obstruction Due to Retroperitoneal Tissue Interposition During Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Report of Two Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Navigation-assisted vs robot -assisted unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion for single-level lumbar degenerative disease: a retrospective comparative study.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2026Article
- Global research landscape and citation dynamics of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF): A bibliometric analysis of the 100 most influential articles.Brain & spine · 2026Review
- Oblique lateral interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-level lumbar adjacent segment disease: a retrospective comparative study of clinical and radiographic outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Dual-position oblique lumbar interbody fusion with fluoroscopy (D-OLIF) requires repositioning the patient to a prone position for pedicle screw insertion. Recently, single-position surgery with navigation has been introduced. However, there are concerns regarding pedicle screw accuracy and achieving appropriate sagittal balance in single-position OLIF with navigation (S-OLIF). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of S-OLIF compared to D-OLIF. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 102 patients who underwent single-level OLIF at a single institution. The patients were divided into two groups: 55 in the S-OLIF group and 47 in the D-OLIF group. The numeric rating scale for back and leg, Oswestry disability index, and walking distance improvements showed no significant difference. However, the EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level index showed higher improvement in the S-OLIF (P = 0.029). The segmental lordosis, lumbar lordosis, and C7 sagittal vertical axis showed no significant difference. S-OLIF had significantly fewer cases of pedicle screw malposition (P = 0.045). Additionally, the surgery time was shorter in the S-OLIF (P = 0.002). In conclusion, S-OLIF exhibited clinical and radiological outcomes comparable to D-OLIF, with the added advantages of reduced surgery time and enhanced accuracy in pedicle screw placement.
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.