ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025
Comparison of clinical and radiographic outcomes in unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective analysis of three surgical approaches.
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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modified Spinous Process-Splitting Approach for Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures With Neurological Deficits: Technical Description and Preliminary Clinical Outcomes.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Innovative 3D-printed porous tantalum cage with non-window design to accelerate spinal fusion: A proof-of-concept study.Materials today. Bio · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe primary objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the combined spinous process-splitting approach with a Wiltse (SPSW) approach, the combined conventional approach with a Wiltse (CW) approach, and the conventional open (CO) approach in unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).
methodsThe clinical outcomes were assessed, and intraoperative data and complications were collected. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores for low back pain and leg pain, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) scores for evaluating functions of the lumbar spine and health-related quality of life, and the modified MacNab standard for assessing satisfaction were analyzed. Radiographic outcomes included disc space height, segmental lordosis, interbody fusion assessment, and the rate of muscle atrophy of the multifidus and the erector spinae muscles.
resultsAmong the three groups, the SPSW group exhibited the shortest operation and drain retention time, lowest intraoperative blood loss, and minimal postoperative blood loss. Notably, the SPSW group displayed the highest level of social life function based on the JOABPEQ, and the highest level of patient satisfaction according to the modified MacNab Criteria, along with the lowest rate of muscle atrophy.
conclusionAll the SPSW, CW, and CO approach TLIF procedures achieved overall satisfactory effects of decompression and fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases. The SPSW approach procedure appears to be associated with the smallest surgical trauma and highest satisfaction because of reducing iatrogenic injury of the paraspinal muscles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39212712What 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.