ArticleAsian spine journal2024
Can unilateral-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion replace the traditional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedure for lumbar degenerative disc diseases?: a single center matched case-control mid-term outcome study.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2024. 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.
- Direct endoscopic visualization improves endplate preparation in lumbar interbody fusion: a comparative study of biportal endoscopic and conventional techniques.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 · 2026Article
- Lumbar spinal stenosis: current concept of management.Asian spine journal · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designMatched case-control study. PURPOSE: To evaluate the midterm outcomes of unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedure, ascertain efficacy of UPSF in adequately decompressing contralateral foramen+spinal canal and reducing rate of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) at 4-8-year follow-up (FU). OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Previous meta-analyses found no significant differences between UPSF and BPSF regarding fusion rates, clinical and radiological outcomes; however, few studies have reported higher rates of cage migration/subsidence and pseudoarthrosis in the UPSF. No study has evaluated the impact of UPSF on indirect decompression and ASD.
methodsRetrospective analysis of 319 patients treated with UPSF vs. 331 patients treated with BPSF between 2012 to 2020. Clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 4 years postoperatively. X-rays were used to assess fusion+ASD and computed tomography scans in doubtful cases. Magnetic resonance imaging was used at last FU to determine cross-sectional area of cord (CSA), foraminal height (FH), and width (FW) restoration.
resultsThe mean FU duration was 50 months (range, 44-140 months). In UPSF, CSA increased by 2.3 times from preoperative values; FH and FW increased by 25% and 17.5%, respectively, at last FU (p<0.001); fusion rate was 94.3%, comparable to BPSF (similar CSA, FW, FH, 96.4% fusion rate). In UPSF, adjacent disc height remained stable, from preoperative 11.39±2.03 to 10.97±1.93 postoperatively at 4 years and 10.03±1.88 at 8 years. BPSF showed ASD in 14 (4.47%) vs. three patients (1.06%) in UPSF (p<0.04). Complication rates were similar (6.58% UPSF vs. 6.04% BPSF, p>0.05).
conclusionsUPSF-TLIF is comparable to BPSF in terms of patient-reported clinical outcomes, fusion rates, and complication rates while being superior in terms of lesser ASD. UPSF enables radiologically and clinically significant contralateral indirect neural foraminal decompression and canal decompression without disturbing the contralateral side anatomy, unlike BPSF.
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.