ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2026
Comparison between novel unilateral uniportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion and conventional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease with bilateral symptoms: A 1-year follow-up retrospective cohort study.
Article in North American Spine Society journal, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Context: Full endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (FELIF) is a minimally invasive alternative to open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (open-TLIF) for lumbar degenerative disease (LDD). This study aimed to compare 1-year outcomes of a modified trans-Kambin FELIF, termed Kambin Torpedo FELIF (KT-FELIF), with those of conventional open-TLIF. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, 76 patients with single-level LDD and bilateral symptoms underwent KT-FELIF (n=30) or open-TLIF (n=46) between January 2020 and January 2024. Patients with prior spinal surgery, multilevel disease, or incomplete follow-up imaging were excluded. Perioperative data, pain scores [visual analog scale (VAS)], radiologic outcomes, and complications were compared at ≥12-month follow-up. Results: KT-FELIF showed significantly lower blood loss (72.00±62.00 mL vs. 173.91±134.37 mL, p<.01) and faster ambulation (1.37±0.49 vs. 2.30±0.81 days, p<.01) than conventional open-TLIF. Both groups showed significant VAS score improvement, but KT-FELIF offered better early pain relief (2 weeks and 6 months, p<.01). Fusion rates were similar (97% vs. 91%, p=.654), though open-TLIF had larger fusion mass (p=.005). KT-FELIF led to greater lumbar lordosis (p=.038) and spinal canal area gains (p=.002), while open-TLIF improved foraminal height more. Complication rates were comparable. Conclusions: KT-FELIF is a safe, effective, and less invasive alternative to open-TLIF for LDD with bilateral symptoms, offering benefits in blood loss, recovery time, and early pain relief, with comparable fusion and radiologic outcomes. Further long-term multicenter studies are warranted.
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.