ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2026
Spinous Process Splitting Laminectomy vs Laminectomy and Fusion for Single-Level Lumbar Canal Stenosis With Low-Grade Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConcomitant spinal canal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis have a wide variation in surgical choices. There is consensus regarding performing fusion for unstable degenerative spondylolisthesis; however, for stable degenerative spondylolisthesis, consensus does not exist. This study aims to compare laminectomy only using spinous process splitting approach and laminectomy and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in the treatment of lower lumbar canal stenosis with low-grade stable degenerative spondylolisthesis.
methodsForty-two patients with single-level lumbar canal stenosis and low-grade stable spondylolisthesis were randomly divided into 2 equal groups of 21 patients each. Group I underwent spinous process splitting laminectomy (SPSL), while group II received laminectomy and TLIF. All patients were followed clinically for a minimum of 1 year to assess neurological recovery and radiologically for instability in group I and fusion in group II.
resultsPostoperatively, both groups showed significant improvements in visual analog scale, Oswestry Disability Index, manual muscle testing, and 6-minute walk distance; these improvements were statistically insignificant except for visual analog scale, where the improvement was greater in group I (
conclusionsSPSL is effective and safe for stable grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis without postlaminectomy instability in short-term follow-up and shows comparable clinical outcomes to laminectomy and TLIF at 1 year. SPSL is more cost-effective than TLIF regarding total hospital cost estimates and early return to activity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1:
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.