SynthesisSaudi medical journal2026
Clinical Outcomes of Decompression Versus Decompression With Instrumented Fusion for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Secondary to Degenerative Spondylolisthesis:
Synthesis in Saudi medical 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare decompression alone with decompression with fusion in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods: PubMed, Google Scholar, Ovid, and Web of Science databases were searched up to March 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes were the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores. The secondary outcomes included operative time, length of hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss, reoperation, complications, and cost. Pooled analysis was performed using a random-effects model in Review Manager following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis 2020. The quality of included randomized trials was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Results: Of the 4,507 studies, 5 RCTs (n = 898) were included. Both interventions improved ODI and VAS scores, with no significant differences for ODI (mean difference [MD], -3.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.59 to 0.17, Conclusions: Both interventions significantly improved pain and disability. Decompression alone was associated with a lower perioperative morbidity and some evidence of greater back pain relief, supporting its role as a reasonable initial surgical option, with fusion reserved for patients requiring stabilization.
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.