Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39089884›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2024

Prone Single Position Approach to Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Matthew Rohde, Alexandra Echevarria, Robert Carrier, Matthew Zinner, Alex Ngan, Rohit Verma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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.

Matthew RohdeDonald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY, USA rohde.matt1@gmail.com.
Alexandra EchevarriaNorthwell Health Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NorthShore University Hospital, Manhasset, NY, USA.
Robert CarrierNorthwell Health Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NorthShore University Hospital, Manhasset, NY, USA.
Matthew ZinnerNorthwell Health Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NorthShore University Hospital, Manhasset, NY, USA.
Alex NganNorthwell Health Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NorthShore University Hospital, Manhasset, NY, USA.
Rohit VermaNorthwell Health Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NorthShore University Hospital, Manhasset, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with posterior screw fusion is a safe and effective treatment for patients suffering from degenerative spine disorders. While LLIF has been shown to restore disc height, decompress neural components, correct sagittal imbalances, and improve pain scores, the approach requires repositioning patients for posterior pedicle fixation, which requires 2 separate surgeries. The evolution of surgical techniques, navigation, and robotics has allowed for a single position approach to LLIF with the patient in the prone position. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the prone single position (PSP) LLIF approach to the dual position LLIF approach. We hypothesized that PSP LLIF will have a reduced operative time, complication rate, and blood loss compared with the dual position LLIF procedure.

methodsA systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. PubMed and Embase databases were searched with key terms: (lateral AND [interbody OR "inter body"] AND lumbar AND fusion) AND (prone OR single). Results were extracted and reviewed by 2 authors (MR and RB) per selection criteria. Patient demographics were extracted from the selected studies, along with surgical, patient-reported, and radiographic outcomes. A meta-analysis was performed using an unstandardized mean difference or log odds ratio with a confidence level of 95%.

resultsFifteen studies were included in the systematic review and 5 studies compared PSP LLIF to dual position LLIF for meta-analysis. PSP LLIF had a reduced operative time and length of stay compared with the dual position approach, although there was no significant reduction in estimated blood loss. Additionally, PSP LLIF improved lumbar lordosis more effectively than dual position LLIF. There was no difference in segmental lordosis or pelvic tilt. There was no difference in intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, or reoperations.

conclusionsPSP LLIF reduces operative time and length of stay, with no relative increase in complications or reoperations compared with the dual position approach. Additionally, PSP LLIF improves lumbar lordosis relative to dual position LLIF, which may improve functional outcomes and reduce the risk of developing adjacent segment disease. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The associated operative and postoperative benefits of PSP LLIF may improve long-term outcomes of patients undergoing spinal fusion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1:

Indexed as

degenerative disc diseaselateral fusionLumbar interbody fusionpedicle screw fixationProne single position fusion

Identifiers

PMID39089884
PMCPMC11483458

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.