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
Oblique lateral interbody fusion with prioritized core vertebral correction technology for the treatment of lumbosacral curve-driven degenerative lumbar scoliosis.
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to assess the effectiveness of oblique lateral interbody fusion, which prioritizes the correction of core distance, in comparison to traditional posterior surgery, in patients with lumbosacral curve-driven degenerative lumbar scoliosis.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed consecutive patients with lumbosacral curve-driven degenerative lumbar scoliosis at a single institution from January 2019 to December 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: the traditional posterior approach group (n = 55) (Group T) and the prioritized core vertebral correction technology group (n = 52) (Group P-CV). Preoperative and postoperative data were analyzed using the SRS-22r score and imaging. To further illustrate the significance of prioritizing the core distance, a correlation analysis was conducted between the core distance and preoperative as well as postoperative coronal parameters.
resultsThere was no significant difference in preoperative baseline data between two groups (P>0.05). Preoperative core distance was correlated with L4 tilt, L5 tilt, thoracolumbar Cobb, Aa, and CBD (P<0.05). Compared with Group T, intraoperative changes in core distance, change of core distance/preoperative core distance, CBD, Aa, and lumbosacral Cobb were greater in Group P-CV than in Group T. Similarly, postoperative CBD, Aa, L4 tilt, L5 tilt, core distance, and lumbosacral Cobb were smaller in Group P-CV than in Group T (P<0.05). The changes in core distance and core distance/preoperative core distance were correlated with postoperative CBD (-0.529, -0.771, P<0.05). Group P-CV had shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, and fewer surgical segments (P<0.05).
conclusionThe core vertebrae of patients with lumbosacral curve-driven degenerative lumbar scoliosis can be identified by distance measurement. Oblique lateral interbody fusion with prioritized core vertebral correction technology can effectively prevent coronal imbalance after surgery, thereby improving the lumbosacral curve. This technique provides a safe and effective approach for treating lumbosacral curve-driven degenerative lumbar scoliosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41094113What 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.