ArticleInternational orthopaedics2025
Comparative analysis of anterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in clinical outcomes: ALIF associated with lower rates of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in a long-term follow-up study.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomechanical advances in oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion using different interbody cages.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Review
- Efficacy comparison of arthroscopic-assisted uniportal spinal surgery and percutaneous endoscopic discectomy for adjacent segment lumbar disc herniation after fusion surgery.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
- Clinical and spinopelvic outcomes of Transforaminal versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion at L5-S1: a short-term ambispective cohort study.Brain & spine · 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
Abstract
purposeTo compare the long-term efficacy of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in treating lumbar degenerative diseases.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 57 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases who underwent either ALIF or TLIF from March 2003 to October 2007. Patients were divided into an ALIF group (n = 27) and a TLIF group (n = 30). Pain was evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS), and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was used to assess clinical outcomes. Radiographic adjacent segment degeneration (rASD) was evaluated using the Modified Pfirrmann Scale. Three-dimensional CT was used to assess the fusion rate at the last follow-up.
resultsFollow-up duration ranged from 58 to 120 months, with an average of 90.6 months. No significant difference was observed in VAS and ODI scores between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, significant differences were noted before and after the operation (P < 0.05). The intervertebral disc height (IDH) and lumbar lordosis (LL) increased after the operation and during follow-ups. The IDH and LL in the ALIF group were significantly higher than those in the TLIF group both postoperatively and at follow-ups (P < 0.05). At the last follow-up, the incidence of rASD in the ALIF group was significantly lower than in the TLIF group (P < 0.05).
conclusionsBoth ALIF and TLIF provide satisfactory long-term outcomes for lumbar degenerative diseases. ALIF more effectively restores and maintains lumbar intervertebral height and lumbar lordosis, potentially reducing the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40293512What 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.