ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2025
Therapeutic efficacy of endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion in patients with lumbar instability and analysis of prognostic factors.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ELIF) in the management of lumbar instability and identify potential prognostic factors.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 278 patients treated for lumbar instability at Baoji Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine between February 2021 and November 2023. Based on treatment approach, the patients were divided into two arms: ELIF group (n=141) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) group (n=137). Comparisons were conducted across multiple clinical metrics including operation time, intraoperative hemorrhage volume, duration of postoperative hospitalization, and functional-pain-related assessments such as VAS (visual analogue scale), ODI (Oswestry Disability Index), and JOA (Japanese Orthopedic Association) scores. Additional imaging outcomes (e.g., lumbar lordosis, degree of spondylolisthesis, and dural cross-sectional area) were also evaluated. JOA improvement over a 12-month period was the primary follow-up indicator. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was employed to identify prognostic risk factors.
resultsELIF was associated with significantly reduced surgical duration, less intraoperative blood loss, and faster postoperative recovery (P<0.05). Postoperatively, ELIF patients exhibited significantly lower VAS and ODI scores and higher JOA score (P<0.05). Radiographic improvements in sagittal balance (lumbar lordosis), vertebral alignment (spondylolisthesis), and neural decompression (dural area) were more pronounced in the ELIF group (P<0.05). One year post-surgery, the JOA score improvement in the ELIF group remained superior. However, advanced age (≥60 years), diabetes, severe preoperative spondylolisthesis (≥ grade II), and baseline JOA <10 were independently associated with suboptimal outcomes.
conclusionELIF is an effective approach for treating lumbar instability, offering advantages in efficiency, functional recovery, and postoperative rehabilitation. Identifying key prognostic factors may refine clinical decision-making and optimize perioperative strategies for improved outcomes.
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.