ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
The biomechanical effects of treating double-segment lumbar degenerative diseases with unilateral fixation through interlaminar fenestration interbody fusion surgery: a three-dimensional finite element study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical efficacy and quality of life in elderly patients with lumbar degenerative disease treated with TLIF combined with unilateral pedicle screw fixation: a randomized controlled study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Trial
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTransforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery has become increasingly popular in the surgical treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. The optimal structure for stable double-segment fixation remains unclear.
objectiveTo compare the biomechanical changes of unilateral fixation versus bilateral fixation in patients with lumbar degeneration undergoing double-segment TLIF surgery, and to explore the stability and feasibility of unilateral double-segment fixation.
methodsA three-dimensional finite element model of L3-5 was established based on CT data from a recruited young male volunteer, and the model was validated to have reasonable predictive capability. Surgical procedures were simulated by adjusting bony structures to create models of unilateral and bilateral fixation for double-segment TLIF. Under a pure moment of 10 Nm, range of motion (ROM), extension, lateral bending, axial rotation movements, as well as stresses on interbody fusion devices, internal fixation, and endplates were recorded and compared.
resultsUnilateral fixation was fixed on the left side, with both groups performing flexion, extension, left lateral flexion, right lateral flexion, left rotation, and right rotation movements. All reconstructed conditions showed decreased motion from L3 to L5. Unilateral fixation had greater lumbar spine range of motion (ROM) in all directions compared to bilateral fixation. The greatest difference between the two occurred during right lateral flexion at the L3-4 segment, measuring 1.78°. During right lateral flexion at the L4-5 segment, the largest difference was 2.29°. Regarding stress on the fusion devices, unilateral fixation models exhibited higher stresses than bilateral fixation models, but no significant differences in stability were found. Terminal plate stress in unilateral posterior fixation was higher during flexion than in the bilateral model, showing a similar trend in stress changes. No significant difference was seen in internal fixation stress between the two groups during two-segment fusion, with the posterior internal fixation stress in unilateral fixation being 1.7 times higher during flexion and 1.9 times higher during left bending compared to bilateral fixation.
conclusionUnilateral fixation in two-segment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery can increase stability compared to bilateral fixation, with no significant differences observed between the two models. Unilateral two-segment fixation allows for greater lumbar spine mobility than bilateral fixation, albeit with a slight increase in stress on the posterior fixation and fusion devices under the unilateral fixation mode. This provides some biomechanical evidence for selecting surgical approaches for elderly patients who cannot tolerate long surgeries, suggesting that two-segment unilateral fixation may be advisable. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.