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
Comparative analysis of oblique lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for L5-S1 level: clinical and radiological outcomes.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for surgical treatment at the L5-S1 level in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 88 patients, 44 who underwent OLIF (group O) and 44 who underwent PLIF (Group P) between April 2014 and November 2020. Clinical outcomes were assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Radiological parameters including lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral slope (SS), and lumbosacral angle (LSA) were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively for up to 2 years.
resultsGroup O demonstrated superior improvements in back pain VAS, ODI, and EQ-5D scores compared with Group P at the final follow-up. Radiologically, Group O showed better restoration of LL and SS. Group O also exhibited an improvement in LSA, whereas Group P showed a deterioration.
conclusionOLIF may offer advantages over PLIF in L5-S1 level interventions, particularly for sagittal alignment restoration and long-term back pain management. Its ability to accommodate larger and more lordotic cages and to provide greater flexibility in cage positioning allows for more patient-specific surgical planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41313461What 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.