Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41971895›Full record

ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2026

Three-stage anterior lumbar interbody fusion revision surgery for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage retrieval: surgical steps and preliminary results.

Francesco Caiazzo, Daniel Alveal-Mellado, Lucas Capo, Paula Lavezzolo, Judith Salat-Batlle, Beatriz Iguácel-Duarte, Juan Bago

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Francesco CaiazzoInstituto Quirúrgico Spanò, Sagrada Familia Medical Center, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8848-9901
Daniel Alveal-MelladoInstituto Quirúrgico Spanò, Sagrada Familia Medical Center, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2172-370X
Lucas CapoInstituto Quirúrgico Spanò, Sagrada Familia Medical Center, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4303-5081
Paula LavezzoloInstituto Quirúrgico Spanò, Sagrada Familia Medical Center, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-0592-9332
Judith Salat-BatlleInstituto Quirúrgico Spanò, Sagrada Familia Medical Center, Barcelona, Spain.
Beatriz Iguácel-DuarteInstituto Quirúrgico Spanò, Sagrada Familia Medical Center, Barcelona, Spain.
Juan BagoInstituto Quirúrgico Spanò, Sagrada Familia Medical Center, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9359-8088

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Revising failed transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) presents significant surgical challenges, primarily due to the presence of dense scar tissue and pre-existing cage placement. While anterior surgical approaches offer superior visualization for cage retrieval, existing posterior instrumentation often complicates adequate intervertebral distraction, which is crucial for both comprehensive cage removal and effective deformity correction. Here, we detail a three-stage surgical strategy (back-front-back) adopted in Instituto Quirúrgico Spanò to overcome these inherent limitations. Stage 1 involves the careful removal of existing posterior rods and release of the posterior tension band to re-establish segmental mobility. Stage 2 proceeds with an anterior approach to facilitate the precise removal of the failed interbody cage, meticulous preparation of the endplates, and the subsequent implantation of a new, hyperlordotic anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) cage, essential for optimal restoration of sagittal alignment. Finally, stage 3 focuses on definitive posterior stabilization using new pedicle screws and rods. To assess the safety and efficacy of this technique, we conducted a retrospective review of 11 consecutive patients who underwent revision surgery, presenting with conditions such as pseudarthrosis, cage subsidence, or sagittal malalignment. The three-stage procedure was technically successful in all 11 patients, with no major complications reported at the one-year follow-up. The mean surgical time recorded was 258 minutes, with an average estimated blood loss of 493 mL. Postoperative imaging studies consistently confirmed satisfactory cage placement in all treated cases, demonstrating the viability and promising outcomes of this comprehensive surgical approach.

Indexed as

anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF)revision surgeryTransforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)

Identifiers

PMID41971895
PMCPMC13063031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.