ReviewJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2026
Biomechanical advances in oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion using different interbody cages.
Review in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is a minimally invasive spinal fusion technique that has gained increasing popularity in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. The interbody cage is a critical implant in OLIF procedures, and its material properties, structural design, dimensions, placement location, and combination with supplemental fixation strategies play a decisive role in determining immediate postoperative stability, fusion rate, restoration of disc height and lumbar lordosis, stress distribution, and the risk of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). This review aims to summarize recent biomechanical research advances on OLIF combined with different interbody cages, to critically evaluate the advantages and limitations of various cage designs, and to analyze the effects of different fixation strategies on postoperative biomechanical performance. By comparing the biomechanical characteristics of polyetheretherketone, titanium alloy, novel biodegradable, and composite cages, and integrating evidence from finite element analyses, in vitro biomechanical experiments, and clinical studies, this review elucidates their differences in providing spinal stability, promoting osseous fusion, and reducing postoperative complications. In addition, this article highlights the biomechanical impact of cage placement, size, and geometry, and explores how topological optimization and patient-specific design may further enhance cage performance. Drawing on successful experiences with interbody cage designs in cervical fusion surgery, future directions for lumbar interbody cages are discussed, including integrated structural design, material innovation, and personalized customization, with the goal of providing optimized surgical strategies and implant selection for clinical practice.
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.