ArticleJournal of Korean Neurosurgical Society2026
Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Double-Cage Full Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Compared with Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion : A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of Korean Neurosurgical 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDegenerative lumbar diseases accompanied by instability or severe foraminal stenosis are commonly treated with lumbar interbody fusion surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of double-cage full endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (FE-TLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for the treatment of patients with severe degenerative lumbar disease.
methodsThe clinical and radiological data of patients who underwent FE-TLIF using double cages or PLIF between March 2021 and February 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with single-level degenerative lumbar disease and Meyerding grade I spondylolisthesis who failed to respond to conservative treatment for 12 weeks were included. Patients with multilevel diseases, previous surgeries, or other spinal pathologies were excluded.
resultsIn total, 115 patients were included in the study (58 underwent FE-TLIF and 57 underwent PLIF). Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. The operation time and blood loss were significantly lower in the FE-TLIF group, and the cage height and angle were slightly greater. The FE-TLIF group showed faster postoperative pain relief, whereas the clinical outcomes at 6 and 12 months were similar between groups. At 12 months, the fusion rates and incidence of cage subsidence >2 mm did not differ significantly, even after adjustment. Both groups showed significant improvements in segmental and total lumbar lordosis and disc height, with slightly greater disc height restoration in the FE-TLIF group. The complication rates were low and comparable.
conclusionDouble-cage FE-TLIF achieved fusion and radiological outcomes comparable to those of PLIF, with the advantages of reduced blood loss, shorter operative time, and faster early pain relief. This technique may serve as a minimally invasive and effective alternative for treating single-level degenerative lumbar diseases.
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.