ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
One-year CT evaluation of fusion in adult spinal deformity using supplemental anterior lumbar interbody fusion.
Article in 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, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeThe purpose of this study was to report the one-year posterior fusion rate in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) undergoing posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with supplemental lumbar interbody fusion (LIF).
methodsPatients with ASD who underwent PSF with supplemental ALIF and/or XLIF between October 2021 and December 2023 were prospectively enrolled. Fusion was assessed using fine-cut CT scans with Metal Artifact Reduction (MAR) and multi-planar reconstruction (MPR) one year after surgery, and each level was graded for interbody and posterolateral fusion (Glassman Classification). Interbody and posterolateral fusion were reported as individual fusion grades (1-4) and dichotomized as; Fusion (1-2) and non-fusion (3-4).
resultsOf 57 enrolled patients, 50 had CT scans performed with 53 ALIF and 48 XLIF-treated levels. The mean age was 63.5 ± 11.6 years and 36 (72%) were female. Solid fusion of the interbody and/or posterolateral fusion assessed at the level of the LIF was obtained in 48 (96%) of the patients. Solid interbody fusion was significantly more frequent with ALIF; 49 (93%) compared to XLIF; 26 (54%) (p < 0.001). Additionally, the fusion score was significantly different with ALIF; median 1 [IQR 1-1] compared to XLIF median 2 [IQR 1-3] (p < 0.001). The posterolateral fusion rates did not differ significantly between ALIF (92%) and XLIF (88%) levels/segments (p = 0.470). Additionally, median Glassman scores for posterolateral fusion were similar: ALIF 1 [1, 1] vs. XLIF 1 [1, 2] (p = 0.370). Mechanical failure was observed in 9 patients (Displacement of the cage: 3, sacral screw loosening: 3, screw loosening: 1, rod breakage: 2) four of which were at the level of the LIF. Three patients underwent revision surgery at the level of the LIF.
conclusionPatients undergoing posterior instrumented fusion for ASD with supplemental anterior interbody fusion obtained high fusion rates assessed with CT. Higher rates of interbody fusion were observed in ALIF than in XLIF-treated levels. Despite differences in interbody fusion, similar posterolateral fusion was seen one year after surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40728665What 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.