SynthesisClinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.)2026
Association Between Lumbosacral Transitional Vertebrae and Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Prevalence and Clinical Impact of Lumbosacral Transitional Vertebrae in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study from Central India.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) are common congenital spinal anomalies that may redistribute mechanical loads to adjacent segments. This study aims to provide a comprehensive, quantitative synthesis of the relationship between LSTV & the prevalence, anatomical distribution, and severity of lumbar spondylolisthesis. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through November 2025. Studies comparing adult individuals with LSTV to those without were included. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate pooled odds ratios (OR) for prevalence and distribution, and mean differences for slip severity. Twelve retrospective cohort studies (n = 3929) were included. LSTV was not associated with an increased overall prevalence of degenerative spondylolisthesis (OR 1.28; 95% CI 0.86-1.91; p = 0.22). However, LSTV significantly altered the level of slippage. Patients with LSTV demonstrated strongly increased odds of spondylolisthesis at L4-L5 (OR 13.78; 95% CI 4.30-44.18; p < 0.0001) and a significant protective effect at L5-S1 (OR 0.07; 95% CI 0.02-0.23; p < 0.0001). No significant difference in slip severity was observed in pooled analyses (p = 0.31). LSTV does not increase the overall risk of spondylolisthesis but acts as a biomechanical modifier that markedly redistributes pathology. It protects the transitional segment while shifting mechanical stress and instability to the cranial adjacent level (L4-L5).
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.