FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2176993838> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2176993838 endingPage "415" @default.
• W2176993838 startingPage "413" @default.
• W2176993838 abstract "Goldstein et al. performed a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis of the study results comparing acute perioperative outcomes and adverse event rates of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)/posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) surgery for degenerative lumbar disease.1 The authors also summarized data pertaining to patient-reported outcomes, fusion status, and reoperation rates. From 3301 papers, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria for this analysis. Only 1 prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) was included, whereas the remaining 25 were either prospective or retrospective comparative studies. The authors have conducted a thorough and exhaustive review of the literature and are to be congratulated for incorporating measures outlined in the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for the performance and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Utilizing the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) protocol, the strength of the included studies was designated as “low” and “very low” quality. By pooling populations among these studies, data from more than 800 patients in each treatment cohort were analyzed. Although no significant difference in operative time was identified, estimated blood loss, time to ambulation, and length of hospital stay all favored MIS techniques. Adverse event rates were similar between the two groups; however, the incidence of medical complications was higher in the open cohort. No differences in the rates of nonunion or reoperation were identified. Both patient populations demonstrated improved outcomes; however, a small, but significantly superior, improvement in ODI scores was observed following MIS procedures. As with any literature review, this study is limited by the strength and quality of the data analyzed. Compared to other reviews, this investigation benefits from the inclusion of only comparative studies and the thorough analysis of methodological quality. Heterogeneity among patients, small sample sizes, lack of consistent reporting, and subjective treatment allocation are among the major limitations that introduce bias in these studies reviewed. Without well-designed RCTs, it is possible that an applesto-oranges situation exists wherein the less difficult cases would be treated with MIS procedures. This could certainly impact patient outcomes and compromise the validity of any analysis. In addition, the definition of MIS techniques is often ambiguous in many of these studies. A potential issue is that authors are writing articles comparing the newer MIS techniques versus the older open procedures, and as such, there may be a bias towards demonstrating more favorable outcomes for the newer MIS procedures. Although not clearly identified in this review, major concerns regarding studies analyzing MIS procedures have been the duration of follow-up and method, or lack of, fusion assessment. Despite substantial limitations in the available literature on this topic, the authors have done an excellent job of summarizing the available data and providing a thoughtful discussion. Their conclusion, that a well-designed," @default.
• W2176993838 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2176993838 creator A5018359512 @default.
• W2176993838 creator A5036281467 @default.
• W2176993838 date "2016-03-01" @default.
• W2176993838 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2176993838 title "Editorial: Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of minimally invasive surgery during transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion/posterior lumbar interbody fusion" @default.
• W2176993838 cites W1486596764 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W1966833375 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W1982296152 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W1984339404 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W1993650020 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W2008294515 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W2023594063 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W2024558001 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W2028154423 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W2045046939 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W2077573335 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W2103399350 @default.
• W2176993838 cites W2165770237 @default.
• W2176993838 doi "https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.3.spine15238" @default.
• W2176993838 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26565763" @default.
• W2176993838 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
• W2176993838 type Work @default.
• W2176993838 sameAs 2176993838 @default.
• W2176993838 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2176993838 countsByYear W21769938382021 @default.
• W2176993838 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2176993838 hasAuthorship W2176993838A5018359512 @default.
• W2176993838 hasAuthorship W2176993838A5036281467 @default.
• W2176993838 hasBestOaLocation W21769938381 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConcept C197934379 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConcept C2780375110 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConcept C31174226 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConcept C44575665 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConceptScore W2176993838C126322002 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConceptScore W2176993838C141071460 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConceptScore W2176993838C197934379 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConceptScore W2176993838C2780375110 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConceptScore W2176993838C31174226 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConceptScore W2176993838C44575665 @default.
• W2176993838 hasConceptScore W2176993838C71924100 @default.
• W2176993838 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2176993838 hasLocation W21769938381 @default.
• W2176993838 hasLocation W21769938382 @default.
• W2176993838 hasOpenAccess W2176993838 @default.
• W2176993838 hasPrimaryLocation W21769938381 @default.
• W2176993838 hasRelatedWork W2002120878 @default.
• W2176993838 hasRelatedWork W2027775670 @default.
• W2176993838 hasRelatedWork W2046253100 @default.
• W2176993838 hasRelatedWork W2065155554 @default.
• W2176993838 hasRelatedWork W2075448862 @default.
• W2176993838 hasRelatedWork W2624348350 @default.
• W2176993838 hasRelatedWork W2969768505 @default.
• W2176993838 hasRelatedWork W3032942857 @default.
• W2176993838 hasRelatedWork W4280651597 @default.
• W2176993838 hasRelatedWork W3104886528 @default.
• W2176993838 hasVolume "24" @default.
• W2176993838 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2176993838 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2176993838 magId "2176993838" @default.
• W2176993838 workType "editorial" @default.