ArticleJournal of pain research2025
Comparative Analysis of Paraspinal Muscle Fat Infiltration and Clinical Efficacy Following Single-Level UBD-TLIF versus MIS-TLIF: A Retrospective MRI-Based Study.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Early biochemical muscle injury and one-year clinical and imaging outcomes following microsurgical versus endoscopic lumbar discectomy: A prospective comparative study.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The paraspinal muscles, particularly the multifidus and erector spinae, are essential for supporting physiological loads, coordinating functional movements, and ensuring lumbar segment stability. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Uni-Portal Bi-Channel Dual-Media Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (UBD-TLIF) versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF) in minimizing paraspinal muscle damage during lumbar surgeries. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent single-level UBD-TLIF or MIS-TLIF from January 2020 to December 2022. Key outcomes measured included preoperative and postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, radiological changes in paravertebral muscle integrity via MRI, operative time, estimated blood loss, and length of hospital stay. Results: Among 103 patients (51 cases in UBD-TLIF group), no significant baseline differences were observed. Although UBD-TLIF takes longer operative time (210.80±71.86 min vs 181.12±36.74 min, P=0.002), UBD-TLIF group showed a significant less reduction in fat infiltration with a mean change of 7.29±2.46 versus 10.51±3.72 for MF (P<0.001) and 4.63±1.98 versus 7.62±2.83 for ES (P<0.001). Earlier recovery was noted in UBD-TLIF group, with Day 3 postoperative VAS scores for back pain significantly lower (2.12±0.84) compared to MIS-TLIF (3.48±1.08, P<0.001), also shorter length of hospital stay (7.02±1.75 vs 8.38±1.33, P<0.001). Additionally, UBD-TLIF group showed less estimated blood loss (155.69±93.41mL vs 230.96±102.18 mL, P<0.001). Conclusion: UBD-TLIF offers clinical outcomes comparable to MIS-TLIF for single-level lumbar interbody fusion surgery while providing enhanced muscle preservation and faster postoperative recovery. Additionally, the use of T2-weighted MRI and ImageJ software for measuring fat infiltration rates proves to be a reliable method.
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.