ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative study of direct pars repair versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for low grade isthmic spondylolisthesis: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Clinical and radiographic outcomes of robotic-assisted direct pars repairs for spondylolysis.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- Endoscopic and percutaneous minimally invasive repair of pars interarticularis defects: a systematic review of clinical outcomes.Spine deformity · 2026Review
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
Spinal fusion has shown satisfactory efficacy in the treatment of adult patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis (LGIS), however, the efficacy of direct repair (DR) for LGIS has not been established, and there is as yet a few reports on it. To assess the clinical efficacy of DR with the pedicle screw-rod-hook (PSRH) fixation and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in adult patients with symptomatic LGIS. A total of 140 adult patients with LGIS were enrolled from April 2009 to December 2018, of whom, 69 cases underwent DR using the PSRH system and 71 cases underwent TLIF, with clinical efficacy evaluated comparatively using clinical and radiological assessments. The patients in both groups showed satisfactory pain relief efficacy and improvement in lumbar spine function. Bone fusion rate was 97.10% in the DR group vs. 100% in the TLIF group. The range of motion (ROM) of the surgical segment was significantly decreased from 13.72 ± 6.73 preoperatively to 11.60 ± 9.70 at the final follow-up (FFU) in the DR group and lost in the TLIF group, however, that of the upper intervertebral space (UIS) in each group or between groups before and after operation did not differ significantly. Both DR and TLIF are effective for adult patients with LGIS. As compared with TLIF, DR is more effective in preserving the ROM of the operative segment yet with less impact on adjacent segments.
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.