Objective To evaluate long-term bone quality changes within the fusion construct (FC) after 2- to 3-level lumbar fusion using computed tomography (CT)-derived Hounsfield units (HUs).
Methods Among 520 screened patients, 222 who underwent 2- to 3-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion met the inclusion criteria. HU values were measured on CT scans preoperatively, at 1-year postoperative, and at final follow-up. The percentage change in HU (HU [final–pre]%) was calculated for each vertebral level.
Results At the final follow-up, the FC demonstrated a significant decline in HU compared to preoperative values (median [10th–90th percentile], 132.0 [86.5–220.4]; 95% confidence interval [CI], 116.0–142.5 vs. 124.5 [71.0– 210.0]; 109.8–135.1; HU (final–pre)%: -11.0 [-62.0 to 48.5]; -19.9 to -6.1; p<0.001). In contrast, HU increased significantly at the uppermost instrumented vertebra (HU (final–pre)%: median [10th–90th percentile], 28.3 [-19.9 to 102.9]; 95% CI, 21.1–36.4; p<0.001), likely reflecting increased mechanical demands. Subgroup analysis revealed a more pronounced decline in HU in patients with longer follow-up durations, particularly in the FC group (p=0.003).
Conclusion CT-derived HU revealed progressive trabecular bone loss within FC over time after lumbar fusion. In patients with longer postoperative intervals, clinicians should remain aware of the potential weakening of the FC, which has important implications when considering implant removal or planning revision surgery.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
A Commentary on “Disuse Bone Loss in Fusion Constructs After Multilevel Lumbar Fusion: A Computed Tomography Hounsfield Unit Analysis” Jiajun Deng, Hongsheng Lin Neurospine.2026; 23(2): 504. CrossRef
Reply Letter: A Commentary on “Disuse Bone Loss in Fusion Constructs After Multilevel Lumbar Fusion: A Computed Tomography Hounsfield Unit Analysis” Hyun-Jun Jang, Dongkyu Kim, Bong-Ju Moon, Kyung-Hyun Kim, Jeong-Yoon Park, Sung-Uk Kuh, Keun-Su Kim, Dong-Kyu Chin Neurospine.2026; 23(2): 506. CrossRef
Objective To evaluate the preoperative and perioperative predictors of persistent leg numbness following lumbar fusion in patients aged ≥ 75 years.
Methods This single-center retrospective study examined 304 patients aged ≥ 75 years who underwent lumbar fusion for lumbar degenerative disease (102 men, 202 women; mean age, 79.2 [75–90] years). The visual analogue scale (VAS) score for leg numbness was examined preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. The persistent leg numbness group included patients with a 2-year postoperative VAS score for leg numbness ≥ 5 points. The demographic data were also reviewed. A multivariate stepwise logistic regression analysis was performed for variables with univariate analysis values of p < 0.2 on univariate analysis.
Results In total, 71 patients (23.4%) experienced persistent postoperative leg numbness. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that a history of lumbar decompression, longer symptom duration, and a preoperative VAS score for leg numbness ≥ 5 points were associated with greater postoperative persistent leg numbness following lumbar fusion. In contrast, other factors, such as sex, body mass index, vertebral fracture, diabetes mellitus, depression, symptom duration, dural injury, operative time, and estimated blood loss, were not.
Conclusion A history of preoperative lumbar decompression, longer symptom duration, and greater preoperative VAS scores for leg numbness were preoperative predictors of persistent postoperative leg numbness following lumbar fusion in older patients. Although lumbar fusion is expected to improve leg numbness, surgeons should consider the surgical history, duration, and preoperative numbness intensity and explain the potential postoperative persistent leg numbness in advance.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
A Comprehensive Radiological Parameter-Based Online Nomogram for Predicting Slower Functional Improvement After Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression Wei Zhang, Yang Zhang, Haibin Zhang, Shuwen Li, Yimin Wu World Neurosurgery.2026; 205: 124716. CrossRef
Clinical Efficacy of Percutaneous Endoscopic Discectomy for the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation in Patients Over 70 Years Old Ying Chen, Zong Yang, Fan Zhang, Jie Liang, Weifei Wu Clinical Spine Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Pain outcomes following long-segment thoracolumbar fusion: a three-year mixed-effects analysis Ishav Y. Shukla, Faraaz Azam, William H. Hicks, Kristen Hall, Omar S. Akbik, Carlos A. Bagley Neurosurgical Review.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Objective This meta-analysis aims to refine the understanding of the optimal choice between different cage shapes in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) by systematically comparing perioperative data, radiological outcomes, clinical results, and complications associated with banana-shaped and straight bullet cages.
Methods A meticulous literature search encompassing PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, China Knowledge Network, and Wanfang Data was executed up to October 5, 2023. Inclusion criteria focused on studies comparing banana-shaped and straight bullet cages in TLIF. The quality of included studies was assessed using appropriate tools such as the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for nonrandomized studies. Rigorous evaluations were performed for radiographic outcomes, including disc height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), lumbar lordosis (LL), subsidence, and fusion rates. Clinical outcomes were meticulously evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and complications.
Results The analysis incorporated 7 studies, involving 573 patients (297 with banana-shaped cages, 276 with straight cages), all with NOS ratings exceeding 5 stars. No statistically significant differences were observed in operative time, blood loss, or hospitalization between the 2 cage shapes. Banana-shaped cages exhibited greater changes in DH (p = 0.001), SL (p = 0.02), and LL (p = 0.01). Despite statistically higher changes in ODI for straight cages (26.33, p < 0.0001), the actual value remained similar to banana-shaped cages (26.15). Both cage types demonstrated similar efficacy in VAS, complication rates, subsidence, and fusion rates.
Conclusion Although banana-shaped cages can excel in restoring DH, SL, and LL, straight bullet cages can provide comparable functional improvements, pain relief, and complication rates.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Cage design-centric glider approach to full-endoscopic lumbar fusion: optimizing nerve root protection in facet-sparing and facet-resecting techniques Yu-Chia Hsu, Hao-Chun Chuang, Yuan-Fu Liu, Chao-Jui Chang, Yu-Meng Hsiao, Yi-Hung Huang, Keng-Chang Liu, Chien-Min Chen, Hyeun-Sung Kim, Cheng-Li Lin Asian Spine Journal.2026; 20(2): 343. CrossRef
Recovery outcomes for military personnel undergoing surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis induced by physical overload: a retrospective study Vasyl Melenko, Lyudmila Kravchuk, Dmytro Nozdrenko, Andriy Maznychenko, Tetiana Abramovych, Inna Sokolowska, Iakіv Fishchenko BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
A Review of Synthetic Bone Grafts in Lumbar Interbody Fusion Jaden Wise, Isabella Merem, Dahlia Wrubluski, Xuanzong Zhang, Ridge Weston, Min Shi, Maohua Lin, Frank D. Vrionis Bioengineering.2026; 13(3): 262. CrossRef
IMPACT OF INTERBODY CAGE GEOMETRY ON OUTCOMES OF MICRODISCECTOMY WITH INTERBODY FUSION Yevgenii Slynko, Roman Chamata, Olexander Potapov Eastern Ukrainian Medical Journal.2026; 14(1): 268. CrossRef
3D printed titanium banana interbody cages versus titanium-coated PEEK bullet cages for TLIF Connor C. Jacob, Ryan Eaton, Jacob Ward, Katelyn Sette, Seth Wilson, Matthieu D. Weber, Olivia Duru, Alexander Keister, Markus E. Harrigan, Andrew J. Grossbach, Stephanus Viljoen Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery.2025; 249: 108731. CrossRef
Comparison of Sagittal Plane Correction With “Bullet” Versus “Banana” Type Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Devices Zach Pennington, Abdelrahman Hamouda, Michael Martini, Rahul Kumar, Anthony L. Mikula, Maria Astudillo Potes, Mohamad Bydon, Michelle J. Clarke, William E. Krauss, Ahmad N. Nassr, Brett A. Freedman, Arjun S. Sebastian, Jeremy L. Fogelson, Benjamin D. Elde Operative Neurosurgery.2025; 29(5): 624. CrossRef
Expandable cage technology in minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion: where are we and what does the future hold? Chibuikem A. Ikwuegbuenyi, Noah Willett, Evan Wang, Sean Inzerillo, Ibrahim Hussain Expert Review of Medical Devices.2025; 22(4): 349. CrossRef
‘Rebound Phenomenon’ – a Cause of Early Cage Back-out in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery: Insights from Case Series of 1545 Patients Jvahar Jill, Sathish Muthu, Guna Pratheep Kalanchiam, Nalli Ramanathan Uvaraj Indian Journal of Orthopaedics.2025; 59(12): 2126. CrossRef
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) with Expandable Banana-Shaped Interbody Spacers—Institutional 5-Year Experience Martin N. Stienen, Lorenzo Bertulli, Gregor Fischer, Linda Bättig, Yesim Yildiz, Laurin Feuerstein, Francis Kissling, Thomas Schöfl, Felix C. Stengel, Daniele Gianoli, Stefan Motov, Ethan Schonfeld, Anand Veeravagu, Benjamin Martens, Nader Hejrati Journal of Clinical Medicine.2025; 14(15): 5402. CrossRef
Segmental lordosis in lumbar stabilization in patients with degenerative pathology: a non-systematic literature review O. N. Leonova, N. S. Kuzmin, E. S. Baykov, A. V. Krutko Russian Journal of Spine Surgery (Khirurgiya Pozvonochnika).2025; 22(3): 67. CrossRef
Comparison of full endoscopic lumbar discectomy combined with and without platelet-rich plasma injections for lumbar disc herniation: a meta-analysis Liangjie Lu, Keyi Xiao, Li-Ru He, Rui-Song Chen, Teng-Hui Zeng, Guang-Xun Lin Asian Spine Journal.2025; 19(5): 728. CrossRef
Radiographic Analysis of Endplate Coverage of a 3-Dimensional-Expandable Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) Implant Compared to Static TLIF and Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Implants Jacob Mazza, Manhal Siddiqi, John Paul G. Kolcun, Dominick Richards, Richard G. Fessler Neurospine.2025; 22(4): 891. CrossRef
Objective Although failure to rescue (FTR) has been utilized as a quality-improvement metric in several surgical specialties, its current utilization in spine surgery is limited. Our study aims to identify the patient characteristics that are independent predictors of FTR among thoracolumbar fusion (TLF) patients.
Methods Patients who underwent TLF were identified using relevant diagnostic and procedural codes from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database from 2011–2020. Frailty was assessed using the risk analysis index (RAI). FTR was defined as death, within 30 days, following a major complication. Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to compare baseline characteristics and early postoperative sequelae across FTR and non-FTR cohorts. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to assess the discriminatory accuracy of the frailty-driven predictive model for FTR.
Results The study cohort (N = 15,749) had a median age of 66 years (interquartile range, 15 years). Increasing frailty, as measured by the RAI, was associated with an increased likelihood of FTR: odds ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) is RAI 21–25, 1.3 [0.8–2.2]; RAI 26–30, 4.0 [2.4–6.6]; RAI 31–35, 7.0 [3.8–12.7]; RAI 36–40, 10.0 [4.9–20.2]; RAI 41– 45, 21.5 [9.1–50.6]; RAI ≥ 46, 45.8 [14.8–141.5]. The frailty-driven predictive model for FTR demonstrated outstanding discriminatory accuracy (C-statistic = 0.92; CI, 0.89–0.95).
Conclusion Baseline frailty, as stratified by type of postoperative complication, predicts FTR with outstanding discriminatory accuracy in TLF patients. This frailty-driven model may inform patients and clinicians of FTR risk following TLF and help guide postoperative care after a major complication.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Predictive value of the risk analysis index for 30-day mortality following surgical management of thoracolumbar vertebral body fractures Stefan Prvulovic, Nithin Gupta, Sina Zhogi, Charles Bowers, Kishan Shah, Alfred Marcinkowski, Anjali Gupta, Christian Bowers European Spine Journal.2026; 35(4): 1964. CrossRef
Is the “Fix-and-Replace” Method Associated With Higher Early Perioperative Risk Than Isolated Internal Fixation for Acetabular Fractures in Frail Patients? Tyler K. Williamson, Luke Verlinsky, Loc-Uyen Vo, Ravi Karia, Case Martin Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma.2026; 40(4): 196. CrossRef
Frailty and the Older Neurosurgical Patient: Assessment, Outcomes and Management Adele S. Budiansky, Dan Budiansky, Daniel I. McIsaac Current Anesthesiology Reports.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Frailty Predicts Failure to Rescue Following Malignant Brain Tumor Resection: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Analysis of 14,721 Patients/ (2012–2020) Stefan T. Prvulovic, Joanna M. Roy, Akshay Warrier, Pemla Jagtiani, Joe Hirsch, Michael M. Covell, Christian A. Bowers World Neurosurgery.2025; 195: 123671. CrossRef
Failure to Rescue After Brain Tumor Resection: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Analysis (2012-2020) Joanna M. Roy, Stefan T. Prvulovic, Akshay Warrier, Arash K. Mousavi, Shubhang Bhalla, Damian Sanchez, Pemla Jagtiani, Vinay Verma, Jonathan Roy Varghese, Praveen Sanmuganthan, Johnny Delashaw, Christian A. Bowers Neurosurgery.2025; 97(5): 1170. CrossRef
Clinical Utility and Actionability of Failure to Rescue Prediction Model for Thoracolumbar Fusion: A Focus on Variable Relevance – A Commentary on “A Predictive Model of Failure to Rescue After Thoracolumbar Fusion” Seyed Amirhossein Tabatabaei, Mohammad Reza Cheraghi Neurospine.2025; 22(2): 615. CrossRef
Reply Letter: A Commentary on “A Predictive Model of Failure to Rescue After Thoracolumbar Fusion” Joanna M. Roy, Aaron C. Segura, Michael M. Covell, Christian A. Bowers Neurospine.2025; 22(2): 617. CrossRef
Frailty assessment in acute spinal cord injury surgery: Insights from the risk analysis index and broader neurosurgical context Omar Sbaih, Stefan Prvulovic, Shubhang Bhalla, Michael Covell, Christian A. Bowers The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine.2025; : 1. CrossRef
Serum Albumin Level as a Predictor of Failure to Rescue in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Spinal Metastases Esli Nájera Samaniego, Rose Fluss, Ali Haider Bangash, Sertac Kirnaz, Saikiran Murthy, Yaroslav Gelfand, Reza Yassari, Rafael De La Garza Ramos Cancers.2025; 17(21): 3477. CrossRef
Neal A. Patel, Sinead O’Bryant, Christopher D. Rogers, Candler K. Boyett, Sachiv Chakravarti, Julian Gendreau, Nolan J. Brown, Zach A. Pennington, Neill B. Hatcher, Cathleen Kuo, Luis Daniel Diaz-Aguilar, Martin H. Pham
Neurospine 2023;20(2):451-463. Published online June 30, 2023
Interbody fusion is a workhorse technique in lumbar spine surgery that facilities indirect decompression, sagittal plane realignment, and successful bony fusion. The 2 most commonly employed cage materials are titanium (Ti) alloy and polyetheretherketone (PEEK). While Ti alloy implants have superior osteoinductive properties they more poorly match the biomechanical properties of cancellous bones. Newly developed 3-dimensional (3D)-printed porous titanium (3D-pTi) address this disadvantage and are proposed as a new standard for lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) devices. In the present study, the literature directly comparing 3D-pTi and PEEK interbody devices is systematically reviewed with a focus on fusion outcomes and subsidence rates reported in the in vitro, animal, and human literature. A systematic review directly comparing outcomes of PEEK and 3D-pTi interbody spinal cages was performed. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Mean Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score for cohort studies was 6.4. A total of 7 eligible studies were included, comprising a combination of clinical series, ovine animal data, and in vitro biomechanical studies. There was a total population of 299 human and 59 ovine subjects, with 134 human (44.8%) and 38 (64.4%) ovine models implanted with 3D-pTi cages. Of the 7 studies, 6 reported overall outcomes in favor of 3D-pTi compared to PEEK, including subsidence and osseointegration, while 1 study reported neutral outcomes for device related revision and reoperation rate. Though limited data are available, the current literature supports 3D-pTi interbodies as offering superior fusion outcomes relative to PEEK interbodies for LIF without increasing subsidence or reoperation risk. Histologic evidence suggests 3D-Ti to have superior osteoinductive properties that may underlie these superior outcomes, but additional clinical investigation is merited.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Polyetheretherketone vs Titanium Cages in Spinal Fusion: Spin Bias in Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Henry Avetisian, Apurva Prasad, Kevin Mathew, David McCavitt, William J. Karakash, Dil Patel, Jeffrey C. Wang, Raymond J. Hah, Ram K. Alluri Global Spine Journal.2026; 16(1): 47. CrossRef
Lumbar Fusion With Micro- & Nano-Textured, 3D Printed Porous Titanium Versus PEEK Interbody Cages in TLIF: A Single-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial Joshua H. Weinberg, Nathan Ritchey, Witty Kwok, Shravani Khisti, Bryan Ladd, Stephanus Viljoen, Siri S. Khalsa, David S. Xu, Andrew J. Grossbach Global Spine Journal.2026; 16(1): 434. CrossRef
Risk factors for subsidence and loss of segmental lordosis segmental lordosisfollowing 1–3-level anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion for degenerative disease: A time-to-event analysis Zach Pennington, Derrick Obiri-Yeboah, Abdelrahman Hamouda, Nikita Lakomkin, William E. Krauss, Michelle J. Clarke, Brett A. Freedman, Melvin D. Helgeson, Ahmad N. Nassr, Arjun S. Sebastian, Anthony L. Mikula, Jeremy L. Fogelson, Benjamin D. Elder Journal of Clinical Neuroscience.2026; 144: 111818. CrossRef
Oblique lateral interbody fusion: role of the elastic modulus of the cage material in mechanically induced osteogenesis Teng Lu, Zhongwei Sun, Xijing He Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine.2026; 276: 109242. CrossRef
Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) Using 3-Dimensional-Printed Titanium Cages Compared With Open TLIF: A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Fusion Rates Sang Hyub Lee, Junghan Seo, Dain Jeong, Sang Youp Han, Dong Hyun Lee, Jae-Won Jang, Dong-Geun Lee, Choon Keun Park Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique.2026; 11(Suppl 1): S28. CrossRef
Design and biomechanical evaluation of a 3D-printed lumbar interbody fusion cage with auxetic metamaterial structure Qiang Zhang, Junwei Li, Yuandong Li, Ningze Zhang, Huizhi Wang, Yangyang Yang, Qingqing Yang, Fuhao Mo, Cheng-Kung Cheng Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials.2026; 180: 107465. CrossRef
Predictors of Interbody Fusion and Adjacent Segment Disease Following Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Pathologies Zach Pennington, Abdelrahman M. Hamouda, Stanley Dennison, Michael L. Martini, Derrick Obiri-Yeboah, Jana Khalifeh, Rawad Turko, Mohamed M. El-Gohary, Clare A. Fogelson, Michelle J. Clarke, William E. Krauss, Brett A. Freedman, Melvin D. Helgeson, Ahmad N Journal of Clinical Medicine.2026; 15(10): 3636. CrossRef
A survival analysis evaluating predictors of implant subsidence after one- or two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion Abdelrahman M Hamouda, Zach Pennington, Stanley Dennison, Rahul Kumar, Michael L Martini, Derrick Obiri-Yeboah, Maria Astudillo Potes, Jana Khalifeh, Rawad Turko, Katherine Zhu, Mohamed M El-Gohary, Eliana L Elder, Michelle J Clarke, William E Krauss, Bre Journal of Clinical Neuroscience.2026; 151: 112105. CrossRef
Interbody Cages: Surface Technologies in Spinal Implants Joseph E. Nassar, Lama A. Ammar, Trevor L. Toavs, Jinseong Kim, Ashley Knebel, Mohammad Daher, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Alan H. Daniels Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Reduced Subsidence With PEEK-Titanium Composite Versus 3D Titanium Cages in a Retrospective, Self-Controlled Study in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Ali Chahlavi Global Spine Journal.2025; 15(3): 1598. CrossRef
A comprehensive review on the State of the Art in the research and development of poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) biomaterial-based implants Prabaha Sikder Acta Biomaterialia.2025; 191: 29. CrossRef
Evaluation of Healthcare Outcomes of Patients Treated with 3D-Printed-Titanium and PEEK Cages During Fusion Procedures in the Lumbar Spine Katherine Corso, Andreas Teferra, Annalisa Michielli, Kristin Corrado, Amy Marcini, Mark Lotito, Caroline Smith, Michelle Costa, Jill Ruppenkamp, Anna Wallace Medical Devices: Evidence and Research.2025; Volume 18: 37. CrossRef
High Fusion Rates with Structured Titanium TLIF Cages: A Retrospective 1-Year Study with and Without Adjacent Level Dynamic Stabilization Sonja Häckel, Jessica Gaff, Alana Celenza, Gregory Cunningham, Michael Kern, Paul Taylor, Andrew Miles Surgeries.2025; 6(3): 52. CrossRef
Preclinical evaluation of lateral interbody fusions using 3D printed PEEK or 3D printed titanium cages William Robert Walsh, Matthew Pelletier, Dan Wills, Tian Wang, Max Lloyd, Michael Veldman, Nick Cordaro, Mark Brady North American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ).2025; 23: 100756. CrossRef
Comparative Analysis Between Single and Double 3-Dimensional Printed Titanium Cages: 1-Year Outcomes After Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Ji Yeon Kim, Jin Hong Hyun, Su Yong Choi, Dong Chan Lee, Hyeun Sung Kim, Dong Hwa Heo Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique.2025; 10(Suppl 2): S225. CrossRef
The Importance of Planning Ahead: A Three-Dimensional Analysis of the Novel Trans-Facet Corridor for Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Segmentation Technology Troy Q. Tabarestani, Peter N. Drossopoulos, Chuan-Ching Huang, Alyssa M. Bartlett, Mounica R. Paturu, Christopher I. Shaffrey, John H. Chi, Wilson Z. Ray, C. Rory Goodwin, Timothy J. Amrhein, Muhammad M. Abd-El-Barr World Neurosurgery.2024; 188: e247. CrossRef
Innovative Developments in Lumbar Interbody Cage Materials and Design: A Comprehensive Narrative Review Sam Yeol Chang, Dong-Ho Kang, Samuel K. Cho Asian Spine Journal.2024; 18(3): 444. CrossRef
Evolution of Titanium Interbody Cages and Current Uses of 3D Printed Titanium in Spine Fusion Surgery Justin J. Lee, Freddy P. Jacome, David M. Hiltzik, Manasa S. Pagadala, Wellington K. Hsu Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine.2024; 18(12): 635. CrossRef
The ability of SPEEK to promote the proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of BMSCs on PEEK surfaces Shuang Wang, Jun-xiong Ma, Liang Zheng, Hong Wang, Hai-long Yu, Yu Chen Heliyon.2024; 10(16): e36448. CrossRef
Design and study of additively manufactured Three periodic minimal surface (TPMS) structured porous titanium interbody cage Kun Li, ChunYan Tian, QiuJiang Wei, XinRui Gou, FuHuan Chu, MengJie Xu, LinHui Qiang, ShiQi Xu Heliyon.2024; 10(18): e38209. CrossRef
The evolution and integration of technology in spinal neurosurgery: A scoping review Moksada Regmi, Weihai Liu, Shikun Liu, Yuwei Dai, Ying Xiong, Jun Yang, Chenlong Yang Journal of Clinical Neuroscience.2024; 129: 110853. CrossRef
The Future of Bone Repair: Emerging Technologies and Biomaterials in Bone Regeneration Julia Weronika Łuczak, Małgorzata Palusińska, Damian Matak, Damian Pietrzak, Paweł Nakielski, Sławomir Lewicki, Marta Grodzik, Łukasz Szymański International Journal of Molecular Sciences.2024; 25(23): 12766. CrossRef
Commentary on “Three-Dimensional-Printed Titanium Versus Polyetheretherketone Cages for Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review of Comparative In Vitro, Animal, and Human Studies” Yanting Liu, Siravich Suvithayasiri, Jin-Sung Kim Neurospine.2023; 20(2): 464. CrossRef
From the Editor-in-Chief: Featured Articles in the June 2023 Issue Inbo Han Neurospine.2023; 20(2): 413. CrossRef
Endoscopic Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Nolan J. Brown, Zach Pennington, Cathleen C. Kuo, Alexander M. Lopez, Bryce Picton, Sean Solomon, Oanh T. Nguyen, Chenyi Yang, Evelyne K. Tantry, Hania Shahin, Julian Gendreau, Stephen Albano, Martin H. Pham, Michael Y. Oh Asian Spine Journal.2023; 17(6): 1139. CrossRef
Objective The lumbar fusion is an important surgery for the orthopedic diseases. The rehabilitation might improve the outcome of patients with lumbar fusion surgery. The rehabilitation-related effects can be revealed by a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The purpose of this study is to clarify the rehabilitation effects in the patients with lumbar fusion surgery.
Methods We performed a systematic search and a meta-analysis for the RCT of rehabilitation treatment on the patients with lumbar fusion surgery. The comparison between rehabilitation treatment (including psychological rehabilitation, exercise, and multimodal rehabilitation) and typical treatment was performed to find if the rehabilitation treatment can improve the outcome after the lumbar fusion surgery. Fifteen studies of lumbar fusion patients under rehabilitation treatment and typical treatment were enrolled in a variety of rehabilitation modalities. The focused outcome was the rehabilitation-related effects on the fear, disability, and pain of patients after the lumbar fusion surgery.
Results Five hundred twenty-eight rehabilitation subjects and 498 controls were enrolled. The psychological-related rehabilitation showed a significant decrease in pain-related fear when compared to usual treatment. The multimodal rehabilitation can improve the disability outcome to a greater extent when compared to usual treatment. The multimodal rehabilitation seemed to have a more significantly positive effect to decrease disability after lumbar fusion surgery. In addition, the exercise and multimodal rehabilitation can relieve the pain after lumbar fusion surgery. The exercise rehabilitation seemed to have a more significantly positive effect to relieve pain after lumbar fusion surgery.
Conclusion The rehabilitation might relieve the pain-related fear, disability, and pain after lumbar fusion surgery.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Posterior-only versus combined anterior–posterior approaches for thoracolumbar burst fractures: a meta-analysis Marc Boutros, Guy Awad, Shaza Hammad, Reina Khatib, Zina Smadi, Chahine Assi European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Fear of movement in patients after lumbar spine fusion and an analysis of factors: a cross-sectional study Yingyan Pan, Qiong Qi, Chao Yang, Meng Dai, Huihui Zhang, Jie Wen, Hailing Qiu Frontiers in Neurology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Early functional training is not superior to routine rehabilitation in improving walking distance and multifidus atrophy after lumbar fusion: a randomized controlled trial with 6-month follow-up Hongyuan Lu, Yanqing Shen, Quanwei Shao, Zheng Huang, Yanjun Cao, Jianqing Su, Fei Li, Weiyi Xiong, Wenyao Li, Kunpeng Li, Wei Feng European Spine Journal.2025; 34(6): 2453. CrossRef
Pain outcomes following long-segment thoracolumbar fusion: a three-year mixed-effects analysis Ishav Y. Shukla, Faraaz Azam, William H. Hicks, Kristen Hall, Omar S. Akbik, Carlos A. Bagley Neurosurgical Review.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Early and midterm efficacy of oxiplex gel on postoperative pain intensity, physical disability, and musculoskeletal power in patients undergoing lumbar discectomy Alireza Tabibkhooei, Maziar Azar, Mohsen Nabiuni, Javad Jahandideh, Mohsen Benam, Farid Qoorchi Moheb Seraj, Feizollah Ebrahimnia, Ali Moradi Egyptian Journal of Neurosurgery.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Relationships Between Skeletal Muscle Mass, Lumbar Lordosis, and Chronic Low Back Pain in the Elderly Myung Woo Park, Sang Jun Park, Sun Gun Chung Neurospine.2023; 20(3): 959. CrossRef
Objective This study is an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomized, controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combined use of recombinant human BMP-2 (rhBMP-2) and a hydroxyapatite (HA) carrier in multilevel fusion in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD).
Methods Thirty patients underwent posterolateral fusion for lumbar spinal deformities at 3 to 5 segments between L1 and S1. The patients received rhBMP-2+HA or HA on the left or right side of the transverse processes. They were followed up regularly at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Fusion was defined according to the bone bridging on computed tomography scans. The fusion rate per segment was subanalyzed. Function and quality of life as well as pain in the lower back and lower extremities were evaluated.
Results The union rate for the rhBMP-2+HA group was 100% at 6 and 12 months. The union rate for the HA group was 77.8% (21 of 27) at 6 months and 88.0% (22 of 25) at 12 months (p = 0.014 at 6 months; not significant at 12 months). All segments were fused at 6 and 12 months in the rhBMP-2+HA group (p < 0.001). In the HA group, 108 of 115 segments (93.5%) were fused at 6 months and 105 of 109 segments (96.3%) at 12 months. Other clinical parameters (visual analogue scale, 36-item Short Form Health Survey, and Scoliosis Research Society-22 scores) improved compared to baseline.
Conclusion Combining rhBMP-2 and an HA carrier is a safe and effective method to achieve multilevel fusion in patients with ASD.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Synergistic enhancement of spinal fusion in preclinical models using low-dose rhBMP-2 and stromal vascular fraction in an injectable hydrogel composite Hye Yeong Lee, Seong Bae An, Sae Yeon Hwang, Gwang Yong Hwang, Hye-Lan Lee, Hyun Jung Park, Joongkyum Shin, Keung Nyun Kim, Sung Won Wee, Sol Lip Yoon, Yoon Ha Materials Today Bio.2025; 30: 101379. CrossRef
Clinical and radiological outcomes of titanium cage versus polyetheretherketone cage in lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis Haozhong Wang, Hao Zhang, Changming Xiao, Kaiquan Zhang, Lisheng Qi Neurosurgical Review.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Optimizing rhBMP-2 Therapy for Bone Regeneration: From Safety Concerns to Biomaterial-Guided Delivery Systems Maria Chernysheva, Evgenii Ruchko, Artem Eremeev International Journal of Molecular Sciences.2025; 26(21): 10723. CrossRef
The bone morphogenetic protein 2 analogue L51P enhances spinal fusion in combination with BMP2 in an in vivo rat tail model Benjamin Gantenbein, Katharina A.C. Oswald, Georg F. Erbach, Andreas S. Croft, Paola Bermudez-Lekerika, Franziska Strunz, Sebastian F. Bigdon, Christoph E. Albers Acta Biomaterialia.2024; 177: 148. CrossRef
Bioactive peptides and proteins for tissue repair: microenvironment modulation, rational delivery, and clinical potential Zhuo-Wen Hao, Zhe-Yuan Zhang, Ze-Pu Wang, Ying Wang, Jia-Yao Chen, Tian-Hong Chen, Guang Shi, Han-Ke Li, Jun-Wu Wang, Min-Chao Dong, Li Hong, Jing-Feng Li Military Medical Research.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Concentration-Dependent Efficacy of Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2 Using a HA/β-TCP Hydrogel Carrier in a Mini-Pig Vertebral Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Model Hye-Yeong Lee, Ji-In Kang, Hye-Lan Lee, Gwang-Yong Hwang, Keung-Nyun Kim, Yoon Ha International Journal of Molecular Sciences.2023; 24(1): 892. CrossRef
Vertebral Primary Bone Lesions: Review of Management Options Anjalika Chalamgari, Daisy Valle, Xuban Palau Villarreal, Marco Foreman, Annika Liu, Aashay Patel, Akanksha Dave, Brandon Lucke-Wold Current Oncology.2023; 30(3): 3064. CrossRef
Multi-modulation of immune-inflammatory response using bioactive molecule-integrated PLGA composite for spinal fusion Hye Yeong Lee, Da-Seul Kim, Gwang Yong Hwang, Jun-Kyu Lee, Hye-Lan Lee, Ji-Won Jung, Sae Yeon Hwang, Seung-Woon Baek, Sol lip Yoon, Yoon Ha, Keung Nyun Kim, Inbo Han, Dong Keun Han, Chang Kyu Lee Materials Today Bio.2023; 19: 100611. CrossRef
Surgical and Clinical Outcomes Associated With the Use of Barbed Sutures and Self-Adhering Mesh System and Polymeric Glue for Wound Closure in Multilevel or Revision Spinal Surgery: A Matched Cohort Comparative Study With Conventional Wound Closure Proced Junho Mun, Seung-Jae Hyun, Jae-Koo Lee, Sungjae An, Ki-Jeong Kim Neurospine.2023; 20(3): 981. CrossRef
Selection of Optimal Lower Instrumented Vertebra for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Surgery Seung-Ho Seo, Seung-Jae Hyun, Jae-Koo Lee, Yong Jae Cho, Dae Jean Jo, Jin Hoon Park, Ki-Jeong Kim Neurospine.2023; 20(3): 799. CrossRef
Optimal Strategies for the Treatment of Osteoporotic Spinal Diseases Dae-Chul Cho Neurospine.2023; 20(4): 1095. CrossRef
The Combined Effects of RhBMP-2 and Systemic RANKL Inhibitor in Patients With Bone Density Loss Undergoing Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Observational Analysis With Propensity Score Matching Seungjun Ryu, Seon-Jin Yoon, Chang Kyu Lee, Seong Yi, Keung-Nyun Kim, Yoon Ha, Dong Ah Shin Neurospine.2023; 20(4): 1186. CrossRef
The minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is a popular surgical technique for lumbar arthrodesis, widely considered to hold great efficacy while conferring an impressive safety profile through the minimization of soft tissue damage. This elegant approach to lumbar stabilization is the byproduct of several innovations throughout the past century. In 1934, Mixter and Barr’s paper in the New England Journal of Medicine elucidated the role of disc herniation in spinal instability and radiculopathy, prompting surgeons to explore new approaches and instruments to access the disc space. In 1944, Briggs and Milligan published their novel technique, the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), involving continuous removal of vertebral bone chips and replacement of the disc with a round bone peg. The following decades witnessed several PLIF modifications, including the addition of long pedicle screws. In 1982, Harms and Rolinger sought to redefine the posterior corridor by approaching the disc space through the intervertebral foramen, establishing the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). In the 1990s, lumbar spine surgery experienced a paradigm shift, with surgeons placing increased emphasis on tissuesparing minimally invasive techniques. Spurred by this revolution, Foley and Lefkowitz published the novel MIS-TLIF technique in 2002. The MIS-TLIF has demonstrated comparable surgical outcomes to the TLIF, with an improved safety profile. Here, we present a view into the history of the posterior-approach treatment of the discogenic radiculopathy, culminating in the MIS-TLIF. Additionally, we evaluate the hallmark characteristics, technical variability, and reported outcomes of the modern MIS-TLIF and take a brief look at technologies that may define the future MIS-TLIF.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Comparing the Effect of Spinal Versus General Anesthesia on Postoperative Opioid Use in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Patient Matched Study Harshvardhan G. Iyer, Jesus E. Sanchez-Garavito, Jorge Rios-Zermeno, Andrew P. Roberts, Juan P. Navarro Garcia de Llano, Loizos Michaelides, Jimena Gonzalez-Salido, Benjamin F. Gruenbaum, Elird Bojaxhi, Oluwaseun O. Akinduro, Ian A. Buchanan, Kingsley O. Journal of Clinical Medicine.2026; 15(2): 781. CrossRef
Uniportal endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for elderly patients with lumbar degenerative diseases: a retrospective comparative study of reduced surgical trauma and accelerated early Juanming Lan, Bin Cao, Yongpeng Lin, Weixiong Hu, Rui Lin, Lulu Li, Bolai Chen Frontiers in Surgery.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Minimally invasive spine surgery: current advantages, limitations, and future directions Weonmin Cho, Soo-Bin Lee, Seong Ho Oh, Young-Seo Park, Kyung-Yil Kang Asian Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Clinical efficacy of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion via bilateral channel for lumbar degenerative disease Ji-hui Zhang, Liang Yu, Jing-fei Xu, Jin-ming Han, Xu-yu Liao, Bo Chai, Liu-jun Zhao Frontiers in Surgery.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparing the efficacy of biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in lumbar degenerative diseases: an umbrella review and meta‑analysis Mohammadreza Bozorgmanesh, Khalil Komlakh, Samaneh Asgari, Mohammad Reza Ramezanpour, Sina Javidmehr Asian Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparative analysis of unilateral biportal endoscopy and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in treating lumbar spinal brucellosis Cao Rui, Yin Ming Frontiers in Surgery.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparing trends and outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures: A retrospective analysis Hania Shahzad, Maximillian Lee, Frank Epitropoulous, Nazihah Bhatti, Varun K. Singh, Venkat Kavuri, Elizabeth Yu Journal of Orthopaedics.2025; 59: 82. CrossRef
Posterior and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Arpan A. Patel, Shaarada Srivatsa, Mark A. Davison, Michael P. Steinmetz Neurosurgery Clinics of North America.2025; 36(1): 11. CrossRef
Synergistic enhancement of spinal fusion in preclinical models using low-dose rhBMP-2 and stromal vascular fraction in an injectable hydrogel composite Hye Yeong Lee, Seong Bae An, Sae Yeon Hwang, Gwang Yong Hwang, Hye-Lan Lee, Hyun Jung Park, Joongkyum Shin, Keung Nyun Kim, Sung Won Wee, Sol Lip Yoon, Yoon Ha Materials Today Bio.2025; 30: 101379. CrossRef
Modified single-incision MIS-TLIF with expandable tubular assistance for degenerative lumbar spine diseases Wenlong Hu, Fei He, Kai Sun, Haiwu Wan, Sijun Ruan, Bo Huang Frontiers in Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Evolution of the Minimally Invasive Surgery Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Where Are We Now? Abraham Dada, Satvir Saggi, Vardhaan S. Ambati, Arati Patel, Praveen V. Mummaneni Neurosurgery.2025; 96(3S): S33. CrossRef
Safety and Utility of Bilateral-contralateral Decompression for Adjacent Segment Stenosis After Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy Dong Hyun Lee, Choon Keun Park, Jae-Won Jang, Dong-Geun Lee Clinical Spine Surgery.2025; 38(10): E488. CrossRef
Long term clinical outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for lumbar spondylolisthesis in a geriatric (>65 years) population: a systematic review and meta-analysis Talgat Kerimbayev, Yerzhan Kuanyshbekov, Serik Akshulakov, Indira Karibayeva Frontiers in Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Outpatient transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion demonstrated favorable safety in comparison to the inpatient setting: analysis of 10,595 NSQIP patients and systematic review Simon G. Ammanuel, Kaissa Sylla, Cuong P. Luu, Momin M. Mohis, Bradley Schmidt World Neurosurgery: X.2025; 27: 100478. CrossRef
Radiation exposure in XLIF surgery utilizing ultra-low radiation imaging with image enhancement software: a randomized controlled trial Benno Bullert, Jula Gierse, Eric Mandelka, Paul A. Gruetzner, Sven Y. Vetter The Spine Journal.2025; 25(12): 2692. CrossRef
Uniportal endoscopic decompression and debridement for infectious diseases of spine with neurological deficits: a retrospective study in China Hui Lv, Jianhong Zhou, Yuan Guo, Sheng Liao, Hui Chen, Fei Luo, Jianzhong Xu, Zhongrong Zhang, Zehua Zhang Asian Spine Journal.2025; 19(2): 205. CrossRef
Novel Design of Expandable Spinal Cage for Efficient Lumbar Spine Fusion Operation Chanwoo Park, Than Trong Khanh Dat, Sung-Jun Park, Dong-Sik Chae, Sung Hoon Choi, Jonghun Yoon Applied Sciences.2025; 15(11): 6323. CrossRef
Optimizing Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Technical Note on Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Dual Cage Strategy Atmaranjan Dash, Karansinh Raosaheb Parve Patil, Anurag Reddy Kancharla, Bhushan P. Meshram, Rajesh R. Jamoria, Amaresh Cadapa Prahallad, Mandar P. Patil, Vaibhav S. Dhawali Journal of Spinal Surgery.2025; 12(2): 37. CrossRef
Tubular Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Is it the Most Versatile and Effective Technique? – A General Review in Comparison with Endoscopic Interbody Fusion Techniques Umesh Srikantha Journal of Spinal Surgery.2025; 12(2): 30. CrossRef
Clinical Insights on Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) Implantations Following Spinal Fusion Surgery: Enhancing and Monitoring Bone Health in Patients Francesco Puglia, Marcello Ferraro, Valentina Longhi, Enrico Gallazzi, Giovanni Andrea La Maida Orthopedic Research and Reviews.2025; Volume 17: 281. CrossRef
Comparative Efficacy of Bone Graft Materials in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Sami Al Eissa, Fahad Al Helal, Majed Abaalkhail, Abdullah Al Shehri, Raed Al Mousa, Abdullah Bin Shabib, Hussam Al Angari, Abdulrahman M. AlJahani, Dana W. AlDughiman Journal of Spine Practice.2025; 4(3): 88. CrossRef
Oral Eupolyphaga sinensis extract promotes lumbar interbody fusion by enhancing vascularization of cartilage endplate Ruixin Zhen, Jiaqi Li, Shaorong Li, Han Wu, Wei Zhang Frontiers in Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Improved Clinical and Radiological Outcomes with Double-Cage Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparative CT-Based Study Yu-Hao Huang, Jwo-Luen Pao Diagnostics.2025; 15(20): 2652. CrossRef
Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with unilateral vs. bilateral pedicle screw fixation in iatrogenic spondylolysis: an in-vitro human cadaveric model Layla Dawit, Jonathan Day, Theodore Joaquin, Daina Brooks, Zan Naseer, Mesfin Lemma, Bryan Cunningham European Spine Journal.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Efficacy of low-dose Escherichia coli-derived recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion Tae Hoon Kang, Jeongwoon Han, Minjoon Cho, Jae Hyup Lee European Spine Journal.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar fusion and modified minimally invasive tubular lumbar fusion for lumbar disc herniation: a two-year retrospective study Jialong Qi, Mingxiang Liu, Tao Shan, Zhou Dong, Guosong Han, Zhihao Ni, Ke Zheng, Li Ma, Zhidong Zhang Frontiers in Neurology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparative Analysis of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (UBE-TLIF) With Dual-Direction Expandable Cages Versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion at L5/S1 Alhareth Maaya, Jin Hwa Eum Cureus.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Hybrid cortical bone trajectory and modified cortical bone trajectory techniques in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L4-L5 segment: A finite element analysis Yixi Wang, Abulikemu Maimaiti, Yang Xiao, Abudusalamu Tuoheti, Rui Zhang, Muzaipaer Maitusong, Qihao Chen, Paerhati Rexiti Heliyon.2024; 10(5): e26294. CrossRef
Pressure Dynamics on Intervertebral Disc Cages in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Cadaver Study Yoshiyama Takaki, Shimei Tanida, Koichi Murata, Takayoshi Shimizu, Shuichi Matsuda, Bungo Otsuki World Neurosurgery.2024; 185: e1321. CrossRef
Risk factors for extended hospital stay following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion Fatima N. Anwar, Andrea M. Roca, Srinath S. Medakkar, Alexandra C. Loya, Ishan Khosla, Kern Singh Journal of Clinical Neuroscience.2024; 128: 110793. CrossRef
Prognostic value in preoperative Veterans RAND-12 mental Component score on clinical outcomes for patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion Andrea M. Roca, Fatima N. Anwar, James W. Nie, Timothy J. Hartman, Srinath S. Medakkar, Alexandra C. Loya, Keith R. MacGregor, Omolabake O. Oyetayo, Eileen Zheng, Vincent P. Federico, Gregory D. Lopez, Arash J. Sayari, Kern Singh Journal of Clinical Neuroscience.2024; 125: 12. CrossRef
Surgical Strategy for Lumbar Disc Herniation based on the MSU Classification: Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy versus Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A 5‐year Retrospective Study Hongtao Li, Changming Xiao, Hongyu Pan, Haomiao Yang, Yang Lei, Haozhong Wang, Sen Li Orthopaedic Surgery.2024; 16(8): 1963. CrossRef
Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with or without release of the anterior longitudinal ligament: A single-center, retrospective observational cohort study Samantha Högl-Roy, Nader Hejrati, Felix C. Stengel, Stefan Motov, Anand Veeravagu, Benjamin Martens, Martin N. Stienen North American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ).2024; 19: 100533. CrossRef
Minimally invasive versus mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in managing low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis Elsayed Mohamed Selim Ali, Mohamed Abdeen, Mohammed Khalid Saleh Acta Neurochirurgica.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Successful Arthrodesis Using a Blended Allograft and Autograft Mixture in Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Case Series Jay Fiechter, Anthony N Baumann, Micah Smith Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Commentary: Digital Tubular-Based Camera-Assisted Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: 2-Dimensional Operative Video Ranbir Ahluwalia, Hani Chanbour, Scott L. Zuckerman, Raymond Gardocki Operative Neurosurgery.2024; 27(5): 673. CrossRef
Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: The Double-Cage Technique Jwo-Luen Pao Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique.2024; 9(2): 203. CrossRef
Postoperative urinary retention after oblique lumbar interbody fusion under the systematic management protocol Joonsoo Lim, Jangyeob Lim, Asfandyar Khan, Chang-Hyun Lee, Jun-Hoe Kim, Sejin Choi, Tae-Shin Kim, Yunhee Choi, Chun Kee Chung, Sangwook T. Yoon, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Chi Heon Kim Scientific Reports.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparative analysis of the efficacy of oblique lateral interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation Daodong Chen, Tao Liu, Kunyang Du, Zhenjun Zhu Scientific Reports.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
An Injectable Engineered Cartilage Gel Improves Intervertebral Disc Repair in a Rat Nucleotomy Model Basanta Bhujel, Soon Shim Yang, Hwal Ran Kim, Sung Bum Kim, Byoung-Hyun Min, Byung Hyune Choi, Inbo Han International Journal of Molecular Sciences.2023; 24(4): 3146. CrossRef
Spinal Canal Remodeling and Indirect Decompression of Contralateral Foraminal Stenosis After Endoscopic Posterolateral Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Pang Hung Wu, Eugene Tze-Chun Lau, Hyeun-Sung Kim, Giovanni Grasso, Il-Tae Jang Neurospine.2023; 20(1): 99. CrossRef
Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Double Cages: Surgical Techniques and Treatment Outcomes Jwo-Luen Pao Neurospine.2023; 20(1): 80. CrossRef
Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Teerachat Tanasansomboon, Jerry E. Robinson, Neel Anand Neurosurgery Clinics of North America.2023; 34(4): 643. CrossRef
Simultaneous Single-Position Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery and Unilateral Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation for Spondylolisthesis Hui Lv, Yu Sheng Yang, Jian Hong Zhou, Yuan Guo, Hui Chen, Fei Luo, Jian Zhong Xu, Zhong Rong Zhang, Ze Hua Zhang Neurospine.2023; 20(3): 824. CrossRef
Saving Stabilizing Structure Treatment With Bilateral-Contralateral Decompression for Spinal Stenosis in Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Using Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy Dong Hyun Lee, Dong-Geun Lee, Choon Keun Park, Jae-Won Jang, Jin Sub Hwang, Jun Yong Kim, Yong-Eun Cho, Sang Won Lee, Dong Chan Lee, Bang Sang Han, Sang Yeop Han Neurospine.2023; 20(3): 931. CrossRef
Surgical treatment of spondylolisthesis by oblique lumbar interbody fusion and transpedicular screw fixation: Comparison between conventional double position versus navigation-assisted single lateral position Junghoon Han, Chang-Min Ha, Woon Tak Yuh, Young San Ko, Jun-Hoe Kim, Tae-Shin Kim, Chang-Hyun Lee, Sungjoon Lee, Sun-Ho Lee, Asfandyar Khan, Chun Kee Chung, Chi Heon Kim, Mohamed El-Sayed Abdel-Wanis PLOS ONE.2023; 18(9): e0291114. CrossRef
The Influence of Spondylolisthesis Reduction on the Adjacent Lumbar Segment Tae-Hwan Park, Yunhee Choi, Tae-Shin Kim, Jun-Hoe Kim, Chang-Hyun Lee, Sum Kim, Young Rak Kim, Yong San Ko, Woon Tak Yuh, John M. Rhee, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Chun Kee Chung, Chi Heon Kim The Nerve.2023; 9(2): 91. CrossRef
Fusion Assessment of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Demineralized Bone Matrix: A 2-Year Prospective Study Sangseok Lee, Jin Woo Jung, Sang-Woo Lee, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Heum-Dai Kwon, Subum Lee, Young San Ko, Pius Kim, Dae-Chul Cho Neurospine.2023; 20(4): 1205. CrossRef
The Combined Effects of RhBMP-2 and Systemic RANKL Inhibitor in Patients With Bone Density Loss Undergoing Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Observational Analysis With Propensity Score Matching Seungjun Ryu, Seon-Jin Yoon, Chang Kyu Lee, Seong Yi, Keung-Nyun Kim, Yoon Ha, Dong Ah Shin Neurospine.2023; 20(4): 1186. CrossRef
Objective To assess the impact of bilateral versus unilateral interbody cages on outcomes for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) procedures.
Methods A retrospective review for primary, elective, single-level MIS TLIF procedures with bilateral posterior instrumentation from 2008–2020 was performed. Patients were grouped according to unilateral or bilateral interbody cage use. Procedures performed without static interbody cages or indicated for trauma, infection, malignancy were excluded. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) included visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index, 12-item Short Form health survey physical composite score (SF-12 PCS), PatientReported Outcome Measurement Information System physical function (PROMIS-PF). PROs were collected preoperatively and postoperatively. Change in PROs (Δ) was calculated and compared between groups. Achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated using established values from the literature. Achievement rates were compared between groups using logistic regression.
Results The study included 151 patients, with 111 unilateral and 40 bilateral cage placements. Charlson Comorbidity Index, diabetes, and insurance status differed between groups (p < 0.050). Prevalence of degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis (both p ≤ 0.002), operative level (p = 0.003), and postoperative length of stay (p = 0.022) significantly differed between groups. The unilateral group had lower 1-year arthrodesis rates (p = 0.035). Preoperative VAS leg (p = 0.017) and SF-12 PCS (p = 0.045) were worse for the unilateral group. ΔPROMIS-PF was greater for the bilateral group at 2 years (p = 0.001). Majority of patients achieved an overall MCID for all PROs, except VAS leg (bilateral group).
Conclusion While preoperative status and postoperative arthrodesis rates differed, patients achieved an MCID at similar rates regardless of use of unilateral or bilateral cages.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Impact of nonunion on patient-related outcomes after single level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: A propensity score–matched analysis Tatsuya Yamamoto, Momotaro Kawai, Tomohisa Tabata, Yohei Takahashi, Jun Ogawa European Spine Journal.2026; 35(4): 1736. CrossRef
Comparative outcomes of unilateral and bilateral cage placement in lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Stavros Stamiris, Dimitrios Stamiris, Elissavet Anestiadou, Athanasios Sarridimitriou, Angeliki Cheva, Antonia Loukousia, Vasilleios Vrangalas, Pavlos Christodoulou, Christos Karampalis Asian Spine Journal.2026; 20(2): 372. CrossRef
Is there a difference in unilateral versus bilateral facetectomy in an open or minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion? A systematic review and meta-analysis Mario Cyriac Tchaya Tcheukado, George Nageeb, Jonathan Hintz, Michael Steinmetz, Mohamed Macki Surgical Neurology International.2026; 17: 110. CrossRef
Comparative analysis of single vs. double cage insertion in unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion: clinical and radiological outcomes Guisi Xie, Yanli Pan, Zhongshu Shan, Chan Wang Lei, Lek Hang Cheang, Jiaming Liang, Junfeng Shen, Wei Zhang, Chengyue Zhu Frontiers in Surgery.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Letter re: Letter to the Editor Concerning ‘Long-Term Incidence of Adjacent Segmental Pathology after Minimally Invasive vs. Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion’ Sitian Niu, Ranran Li, Jingzhi Wang Global Spine Journal.2025; 15(2): 1459. CrossRef
Long-Term Incidence of Adjacent Segmental Pathology After Minimally Invasive vs Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Jae-Won Shin, Yung Park, Sang-Ho Kim, Sung-Ryul Choi, Joong-Won Ha, Hak Sun Kim, Kyung-Soo Suk, Sung-Hwan Moon, Si-Young Park, Byung-Ho Lee, Ji-Won Kwon, Hee-Min Choi Global Spine Journal.2025; 15(2): 1457. CrossRef
Cost-effectiveness analysis of extended endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (EELF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): a prospective observational study Jun-Hoe Kim, Hangeul Park, Chang-Hyun Lee, Chi Heon Kim Scientific Reports.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Long-Term Risk of Adjacent-Segment Disease in Isthmic Spondylolisthesis Treated with Posterior Interbody Fusion Delia Cannizzaro, Gabriele Capo, Matteo Gionso, Donato Creatura, Mario De Robertis, Carla Daniela Anania, Emanuele Stucchi, Emilia Bellina, Ali Baram, Carlo Brembilla, Massimo Tomei, Alessandro Ortolina, Emanuela Morenghi, Franco Servadei, Federico Pessin World Neurosurgery.2025; 196: 123822. CrossRef
Biomechanical Comparison of Transforaminal Interbody Fusion Implants: Static vs Expandable Cages and Unilateral Versus Bilateral Cages Clayton L. Rosinski, Nicole A. D. Watson, Michael E. Kritikos, Kirill V. Nourski, Anthony J. Marincovich, Tyson S. Matern, Prabin Shrestha, Patrick W. Hitchon Operative Neurosurgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Unilateral Versus Bilateral Cages in Lumbar Interbody Fusions: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes Mohammad Daher, Marven Aoun, Pierre El-Sett, Gaby Kreichati, Khalil Kharrat, Amer Sebaaly World Neurosurgery.2024; 186: 158. CrossRef
An evaluation of fusion status following lumbar fusion surgery utilizing multi-planar computed tomography Tariq Z. Issa, Yunsoo Lee, Jeremy Heard, Tyler W. Henry, Michael A. McCurdy, Nicholas Siegel, Caroline Zaworksi, Julia Dambly, Jose A. Canseco, Alan S. Hilibrand, Alexander R. Vaccaro, Gregory D. Schroeder, John Mangan, Mark Lambrechts, Christopher K. Kep European Spine Journal.2024; 33(9): 3545. CrossRef
Postoperative urinary retention after oblique lumbar interbody fusion under the systematic management protocol Joonsoo Lim, Jangyeob Lim, Asfandyar Khan, Chang-Hyun Lee, Jun-Hoe Kim, Sejin Choi, Tae-Shin Kim, Yunhee Choi, Chun Kee Chung, Sangwook T. Yoon, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Chi Heon Kim Scientific Reports.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Commentary on “Three-Dimensional-Printed Titanium Versus Polyetheretherketone Cages for Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review of Comparative In Vitro, Animal, and Human Studies” Yanting Liu, Siravich Suvithayasiri, Jin-Sung Kim Neurospine.2023; 20(2): 464. CrossRef
Comparison of Lumbosacral Fusion Grade in Patients after Transforaminal and Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Minimum 2‐Year Follow‐Up Jinping Liu, Rong Xie, Cynthia T. Chin, Priya Rajagopalan, Ping‐Guo Duan, Bo Li, Shane Burch, Sigurd H. Berven, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Dean Chou Orthopaedic Surgery.2023; 15(9): 2334. CrossRef
A Comparison of Radiographic Alignment between Bilateral and Unilateral Interbody Cages in Patients Undergoing Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Mark James Lambrechts, Jeremy Heard, Nicholas D’Antonio, John Bodnar, Gregory Schneider, Evan Bloom, Jose Canseco, Barrett Woods, Ian David Kaye, Mark Kurd, Jeffrey Rihn, Alan Hilibrand, Gregory Schroeder, Alexander Vaccaro, Christopher Kepler Asian Spine Journal.2023; 17(4): 666. CrossRef
Morphometric Comparison of Interbody Fusion with Cage and Autograft at L4-L5 Levels versus Autograft Alone for Fusion Azmi Tufan, Feyza Karagöz Güzey, Abdurrahman Aycan Bagcilar Medical Bulletin.2023; 8(3): 293. CrossRef
Lumbar interbody fusion with bilateral cages using a biportal endoscopic technique with a third portal Chengyue Zhu, Liangping Zhang, Hao Pan, Wei Zhang Acta Neurochirurgica.2022; 164(9): 2343. CrossRef
Safety and efficacy of unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation for lumbar degenerative diseases by transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis Rui Zhong, Xiali Xue, Runsheng Wang, Jing Dan, Chuanen Wang, Daode Liu Frontiers in Neurology.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Thiago S. Montenegro, Christopher Elia, Kevin Hines, Zorica Buser, Jefferson Wilson, Zoher Ghogawala, Shekar N. Kurpad, Daniel M. Sciubba, James S. Harrop
Neurospine 2021;18(2):389-396. Published online June 30, 2021
Objective To evaluate the use of guidelines for lumbar spine fusions among spine surgeons in North America.
Methods An anonymous survey was electronically sent to all AO Spine North America members. Survey respondents were asked to indicate their opinion surrounding the suitability of instrumented fusion in a variety of clinical scenarios. Fusion indications in accordance with North America Spine Society (NASS) guidelines for lumbar fusion were considered NASS-concordant answers. Respondents were considered to have a NASS-concordant approach if ≥ 70% (13 of 18) of their answers were NASS-concordant answers. Comparisons were performed using bivariable statistics.
Results A total of 105 responses were entered with complete data available on 70. Sixty percent of the respondents (n = 42) were considered compliant with NASS guidelines. NASS-discordant responses did not differ between surgeons who stated that they include the NASS guidelines in their decision-making algorithm (5.10 ± 1.96) and those that did not (4.68 ± 2.09) (p = 0.395). The greatest number of NASS-discordant answers in the United States. was in the South (5.75 ± 2.09), with the lowest number in the Northeast (3.84 ± 1.70) (p < 0.01). For 5 survey items, rates of NASS-discordant answers were ≥ 40%, with the greatest number of NASS-discordant responses observed in relation to indications for fusion in spinal deformity (80%). Spine surgeons utilizing a NASS-concordant approach had a significant lower number of NASS-discordant answers for synovial cysts (p = 0.03), axial low back pain (p < 0.01), adjacent level disease (p < 0.01), recurrent stenosis (p < 0.01), recurrent disc herniation (p = 0.01), and foraminal stenosis (p < 0.01).
Conclusion This study serves an important role in clarifying the rates of uptake of clinical practice guidelines in spine surgery as well as to identify barriers to their implementation.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Can We Finally Quantify Value for Lumbar Fusions? Introducing the Operative Value Index (OVI) Advith Sarikonda, Ashmal Sami, Adam Leibold, Sara Thalheimer, Daniyal M. Ali, Cheritesh Amaravadi, Joshua Heller, Srinivas Prasad, Jack Jallo, Ashwini Sharan, James Harrop, Alexander R. Vaccaro, Ahilan Sivaganesan Clinical Spine Surgery.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Laminectomy alone vs laminectomy with posterior fusion in lumbar spinal stenosis: The role of instability Mikail Chatzivasiliadis, Panagiotis Konstantinou, Dimitrios Koulalis, Lazaros Kostretzis, Nikolaos Gkantsinikoudis, Constantinos Chaniotakis, Krikor Gkoumousian, Stylianos Kapetanakis World Journal of Orthopedics.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Repeat Discectomy or Instrumented Surgery for Recurrent Lumbar Disk Herniation: An Overview of French Spine Surgeons’ Practice Pierre-Cyril Cômes, Amandine Gavotto, Zineb Zouakia, Guillaume Lonjon, Aymeric Amelot, Grégory Edgard-Rosa, Bertrand Debono Global Spine Journal.2025; 15(3): 1533. CrossRef
Synergistic enhancement of spinal fusion in preclinical models using low-dose rhBMP-2 and stromal vascular fraction in an injectable hydrogel composite Hye Yeong Lee, Seong Bae An, Sae Yeon Hwang, Gwang Yong Hwang, Hye-Lan Lee, Hyun Jung Park, Joongkyum Shin, Keung Nyun Kim, Sung Won Wee, Sol Lip Yoon, Yoon Ha Materials Today Bio.2025; 30: 101379. CrossRef
Evaluation of GPT-4 concordance with north American spine society guidelines for lumbar fusion surgery Ara Khoylyan, Jason Salvato, Frank Vazquez, Mina Girgis, Alex Tang, Tan Chen North American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ).2025; 21: 100580. CrossRef
Open Midline Decompression with Ligament Reconstruction for Multiple-Level Spinal Stenosis in Elderly Patients Shin-Jae Kim, Sang-Ho Lee, Junseok Bae NeuroSci.2025; 6(1): 18. CrossRef
The Wasteful Neurosurgeon? Ahilan Sivaganesan, Advith Sarikonda, Adam Leibold, James Harrop, Alexander R. Vaccaro, Brent C. James World Neurosurgery.2024; 187: 285. CrossRef
What Is the Value Proposition of Evidence-Based Guidelines? An Application of the Operative Value Index for Lumbar Fusions Advith Sarikonda, Ashmal Sami, Kevin Hines, D. Mitchell Self, Emily Isch, Adam Leibold, Kavantissa M. Keppetipola, Glenn Gonzalez, Daniyal Mansoor Ali, Sara Thalheimer, Joshua Heller, Srinivas Prasad, Jack Jallo, Ashwini Sharan, Alexander R. Vaccaro, Jame World Neurosurgery.2024; 189: e832. CrossRef
Evaluating the Adherence of Large Language Models to Surgical Guidelines: A Comparative Analysis of Chatbot Recommendations and North American Spine Society (NASS) Coverage Criteria Advith Sarikonda, Emily Isch, Mitchell Self, Abhijeet Sambangi, Angeleah Carreras, Ahilan Sivaganesan, Jim Harrop, Jack Jallo Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Radiological Outcomes of Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis With and Without Discectomy Hyun-Seo Cho, Se-Hoon Kim, Jeong Su Han, Bum-Joon Kim World Neurosurgery.2023; 175: e1307. CrossRef
Narrative Review of Pathophysiology and Endoscopic Management of Basivertebral and Sinuvertebral Neuropathy for Chronic Back Pain Hyeun Sung Kim, Pang Hung Wu, Il-Tae Jang Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society.2023; 66(4): 344. CrossRef
Patterns in Decompression and Fusion Procedures for Patients With Lumbar Stenosis After Major Clinical Trial Results, 2016 to 2019 Rahul A. Sastry, Jia-Shu Chen, Belinda Shao, Robert J. Weil, Ki-Eun Chang, Ken Maynard, Sohail H. Syed, Patricia L. Zadnik Sullivan, Joaquin Q. Camara, Tianyi Niu, Prakash Sampath, Albert E. Telfeian, Adetokunbo A. Oyelese, Jared S. Fridley, Ziya L. Gokas JAMA Network Open.2023; 6(7): e2326357. CrossRef
Biomechanical Effect of Disc Height on the Components of the Lumbar Column at the Same Axial Load: A Finite-Element Study Jae-Gyeong Jeong, Sungwook Kang, Gu-Hee Jung, Mingoo Cho, Hyunsoo Kim, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Dong-Hee Kim, Jong-Moon Hwang, V. E. Sathishkumar Journal of Healthcare Engineering.2022; 2022: 1. CrossRef
A cost-utility analysis between decompression only and fusion surgery for elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and sagittal imbalance Young Il Won, Chi Heon Kim, Hee-Pyoung Park, Sun Gun Chung, Woon Tak Yuh, Shin Won Kwon, Seung Heon Yang, Chang-Hyun Lee, Yunhee Choi, Sung Bae Park, John M. Rhee, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Chun Kee Chung Scientific Reports.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Systematic Review of Current Literature on Clinical Outcomes of Uniportal Interlaminar Contralateral Endoscopic Lumbar Foraminotomy for Foraminal Stenosis Hyeun Sung Kim, Pang Hung Wu, Brian Zhao Jie Chin, Il-Tae Jang World Neurosurgery.2022; 168: 392. CrossRef
Efficacy for Whitlockite for Augmenting Spinal Fusion Su Yeon Kwon, Jung Hee Shim, Yu Ha Kim, Chang Su Lim, Seong Bae An, Inbo Han International Journal of Molecular Sciences.2021; 22(23): 12875. CrossRef
Objective This study aimed to determine the incidence of postoperative fever, the workup conducted for postoperative fever, the rate of subsequent fever-related diagnoses or complications, and the risk factors associated with fever following lumbar fusion.
Methods A retrospective review of patients undergoing lumbar fusion was performed. For patients in whom fever (≥38.6°C) was documented, charts were reviewed for any fever workup or diagnosis. Multivariate regression was used to identify independent risk factors for the development of postoperative fever.
Results A total of 868 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 105 exhibited at least 1 episode of fever during hospitalization. The first documentation of fever occurred during the first 24 hours in 43.8% of cases, during postoperative hours 24–48 in 53.3%, and later than 48 hours postoperatively in 2.9%. At least 1 component of a fever workup was conducted in 47 of the 105 patients who had fever, resulting in fever-associated diagnoses in 4 patients prior to discharge. Three patients who had fever during the inpatient stay developed complications after discharge. On multivariate analysis, operations longer than 150 minutes (relative risk [RR], 1.66; p=0.015) and narcotic consumption greater than 85 oral morphine equivalents on postoperative day 0 (RR, 1.53; p=0.038) were independently associated with an increased risk of developing postoperative fever.
Conclusion The results of this study suggest that inpatient fever occurred in roughly 1 in 8 patients following lumbar fusion surgery. In most cases where a fever workup was performed, no cause of fever was detected. Longer operative time and increased early postoperative narcotic use may increase the risk of developing postoperative fever.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Postoperative Fever in Children Hospitalized After Surgery: Incidence and Risk Factors Peter J. Hong, Lynne Ferrari, Steven Staffa, Ben Reis, Maria Osipovich, Jonathan D. Hron, Jay G. Berry Hospital Pediatrics.2026; 16(5): 357. CrossRef
Postoperative fever after elective minimally invasive resection for gastric and colorectal cancer: incidence, risk factors and characteristics Fan He, Chenglin Tang, Fuyu Yang, Dongqin Zhao, Junjie Xiong, Yu Zou, Defei Chen, Guoquan Huang, Kun Qian Frontiers in Oncology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Postoperative Fever Following Pelvic and Acetabular Fixation: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Lack of Association With Surgical Site Infection Mark Ayoub, Eric Curtis, Yeng Vue, Daniel Wilson, Kamran Movassaghi Orthopedics.2025; 48(4): 229. CrossRef
Postoperative Noninfectious Fever in Degenerative Lumbar Spine Diseases: A Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis Yao Li, Guanyu Yang, Tianci Fang, Fanqi Kong, Peng Yang, Bin Pi, Huilin Yang, Xuwei Ling World Neurosurgery.2025; 200: 124190. CrossRef
A Randomized Study on the Prophylactic Use of Acetaminophen to Prevent Fever after the Removal of Drainage Tubes for Lumbar Surgery Kaifeng Ye, Yan Li, Yong Xing, Kaixi Liu, Fang Zhou, Yun Tian, Yanping Zhang Orthopaedic Surgery.2023; 15(2): 440. CrossRef
Preoperative predictors of prolonged hospitalization in patients undergoing lateral lumbar interbody fusion James W. Nie, Timothy J. Hartman, Keith R. MacGregor, Omolabake O. Oyetayo, Eileen Zheng, Vincent P. Federico, Dustin H. Massel, Arash J. Sayari, Kern Singh Acta Neurochirurgica.2023; 165(9): 2615. CrossRef
Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Posterior Instrumentation at L5/S1 Kevin C. Jacob, Madhav R. Patel, Max A. Ribot, Alexander W. Parsons, Nisheka N. Vanjani, Hanna Pawlowski, Michael C. Prabhu, Kern Singh World Neurosurgery.2022; 157: e111. CrossRef
Postoperative fever after liver resection: Incidence, risk factors, and characteristics associated with febrile infectious complication Hon-Fan Lai, Ivy Yenwen Chau, Hao-Jan Lei, Shu-Cheng Chou, Cheng-Yuan Hsia, Yi-Chu Kao, Gar-Yang Chau, Leonidas G Koniaris PLOS ONE.2022; 17(1): e0262113. CrossRef
Preoperative Cognitive Impairment as a Predictor of Postoperative Outcomes in Elderly Patients Undergoing Spinal Surgery for Degenerative Spinal Disease Hyung Cheol Kim, Seong Bae An, Hyeongseok Jeon, Tae Woo Kim, Jae Keun Oh, Dong Ah Shin, Seong Yi, Keung Nyun Kim, Phil Hyu Lee, Suk Yun Kang, Yoon Ha Journal of Clinical Medicine.2021; 10(7): 1385. CrossRef
Association Between Postoperative Fever and Readmission Rates in Lumbar Fusion Patients Geoffrey P. Stricsek, Thiago S. Montenegro, Glenn A. Gonzalez, Akash Singh, Catriona Harrop, James Harrop Clinical Spine Surgery.2021; 34(6): E349. CrossRef
Local temperature elevation as a marker of spinal implant infection in an animal model Steven D. Glassman, Leah Y. Carreon, Olumide Aruwajoye, Nicholas M. Benson, Ping Li, Arjun Siby Kurian North American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ).2021; 7: 100077. CrossRef
The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Back Pain on Patient-Reported Outcomes, Recovery Ratios, and Patient Satisfaction Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF) Kevin C. Jacob, Madhav R. Patel, Alexander W. Parsons, Nisheka N. Vanjani, Hanna Pawlowski, Michael C. Prabhu, Kern Singh World Neurosurgery.2021; 156: e254. CrossRef
Experimental Comparison of Autograft and DBM Flex (Grafton) for Spinal Lumbar Fusion in Rabbits Cem DEMİREL, Dursun TÜRKÖZ, Tuncay YİLMAZ Archives of Clinical and Experimental Medicine.2021; 6(3): 153. CrossRef
Comparison of Fusion Rate between Demineralized Bone Matrix versus Autograft in Lumbar Fusion : Meta-Analysis Sanghyun Han, Bumsoo Park, Jeong-Wook Lim, Jin-Young Youm, Seoung-Won Choi, Dae Hwan Kim, Dong Ki Ahn Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society.2020; 63(6): 673. CrossRef
Management of Common Postoperative Complications Christopher Stephenson, Arya Mohabbat, David Raslau, Elizabeth Gilman, Elizabeth Wight, Deanne Kashiwagi Mayo Clinic Proceedings.2020; 95(11): 2540. CrossRef
First
Prev
