ArticleFrontiers in surgery2024
Modified single-incision MIS-TLIF with expandable tubular assistance for degenerative lumbar spine diseases.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 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.
- Mini-incision oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and anterolateral screw-rod fixation for surgical treatment of L5 spondylolisthesis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Two minimally invasive fusion techniques for neurogenic claudication caused by degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a minimum 2-year follow-up study.Frontiers in neurology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Evaluating the clinical value of the modified single-incision posterior median approach with expandable tubular assistance for lumbar interbody fusion in managing degenerative lumbar spine diseases. Method: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 121 patients with single-level degenerative lumbar spine disease treated in our spine surgery department from January 2017 to December 2021. Of these, 72 patients underwent a modified single-incision posterior median approach with expandable tubular assistance lumbar interbody fusion (single-incision MIS-TLIF group), while 49 patients received the classic open posterior median incision P-TLIF (open surgery group). We collected basic demographic data including age, gender, BMI, and surgical level. Surgical-related indicators such as operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, length of hospital stay, hospital costs, and complication rates were compared between the two groups. Laboratory results [whole blood C-reactive protein (CRP), serum creatine kinase (CK)] and clinical outcomes [VAS scores for low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), excellent and good rate according to the modified MacNab criteria, and interbody fusion rate according to the Brantigan criteria] were also evaluated. Result: There were no significant differences in the basic demographics between the two groups. The operation time, postoperative hospital stay, and hospital costs were also similar between the groups. However, significant differences were observed in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, and complication rates. On postoperative days 1 and 3, whole blood CRP and CK levels showed marked differences between the groups. At 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, the single-incision MIS-TLIF group had lower ODI scores and VAS scores for back pain compared to the open surgery group. The excellent and good rate according to the MacNab criteria was higher in the single-incision MIS-TLIF group. There were no significant differences in leg pain VAS scores and interbody fusion rates at 12 months postoperatively between the groups. Conclusion: The modified single-incision posterior median approach with expandable tubular assistance lumbar interbody fusion is highly effective in treating degenerative lumbar spine diseases. It results in less postoperative pain, faster recovery, and significant improvement in postoperative functional outcomes, making it a valuable treatment option.
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.