ReviewEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
Interpreting acute postoperative MRI after lumbar spinal fusion: a practical framework for clinical decision-making.
Review in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is frequently performed in the acute postoperative period following lumbar spinal fusion in patients with neurological deterioration or unexpected pain. However, interpretation is often challenging due to expected postoperative changes and metal artifact, which may obscure or mimic clinically significant pathology. In the absence of a structured interpretive approach, this can lead to diagnostic uncertainty and potentially unnecessary reoperation.
methodsA narrative review of the literature was performed focusing on acute postoperative MRI findings following lumbar spinal fusion, mechanisms of metal artifact, and contemporary artifact reduction techniques. Evidence was synthesised across four thematic domains to develop a practical, clinically applicable framework for MRI interpretation.
resultsExpected postoperative MRI findings include soft tissue enhancement, vertebral body or endplate enhancement, instrumentation-related artifact, and epidural fluid collections, which are frequently observed and often clinically benign. In contrast, pathological findings include significant reduction in dural sac cross-sectional area, loss of surrounding cerebrospinal fluid signal, and rim-enhancing epidural or paraspinal collections suggestive of infection. A diagnostic grey zone persists in the acute setting, where supine imaging may exaggerate apparent compression and the natural history of dural sac re-expansion and epidural collections remains poorly defined. Metal artifact further limits interpretation, although techniques such as SEMAC, MAVRIC, and VAT can significantly improve image quality.
conclusionInterpretation of acute postoperative MRI following lumbar spinal fusion requires a structured, clinically integrated approach. This review proposes a practical framework to distinguish expected findings from pathological features while recognizing areas of uncertainty. Appropriate use of artifact-reduction techniques and close collaboration between surgical and radiological teams are essential to improve diagnostic accuracy and guide decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42766025What 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.