ArticleScientific reports2025
Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation for treating two-level lumbar degenerative diseases.
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.
- Exploratory comparisons of unilateral and bilateral fixation in unilateral biportal endoscopic extreme transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Unilateral Posterior Stabilization in Adult Spinal Pathologies: Comparative Clinical, Radiological, and Complication Outcomes of Dynamic Versus Rigid Systems.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and radiological results between unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) and bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) for treating two-level lumbar degenerative diseases. The study involved 106 patients with two-level lumbar degenerative diseases. In the UPSF group (n = 52), 28 underwent intervertebral fusion (IF), 17 underwent posterolateral fusion (PLF), and 7 underwent IF & PLF. In the BPSF group (n = 54), 43 underwent IF, 2 underwent PLF, and 9 underwent IF & PLF. The clinical efficacy and radiological data were evaluated and compared. The UPSF group was significantly lower than the BPSF group regarding operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospitalization expenses. Postoperative visual analog scale scores and oswestry disability index were significantly decreased in both groups compared with pre-surgery. At the last follow-up, the intervertebral disc height of the cranial adjacent segment decreased more in the UPSF group compared with the BPSF group. The incidence of screw loosening in the UPSF group was significantly higher compared with the BPSF group. Compared to BPSF, UPSF can achieve similar and satisfactory clinical efficacy for the treatment of two-level lumbar degenerative diseases with less operation time, muscle damage, blood loss, and hospitalization expenses. However, the occurrence of pedicle screw loosening was higher in the UPSF group.
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.