Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Editorial
. 2024 Feb 26;70(2):e2023D702.
doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.2023D702. eCollection 2024.

Treatment of refractory low back pain due to arthrosis of the lumbar spine with or without spondylolisthesis using anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF)

Adriano Anzai  1 , Haroldo Katayama  1 , Ighor Alexander Zamuner Spir  1 , Mary Martins Nery  1 , Mauricio Anhesini  1 , Oswaldo Silvestrini Tiezzi  1 , Patricia Rodrigues Naufal Spir  1 , Pericles Otani  1 , Wanderley Marques Bernardo  1
Affiliations
Editorial

Treatment of refractory low back pain due to arthrosis of the lumbar spine with or without spondylolisthesis using anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF)

Adriano Anzai et al. Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). .
No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest: the authors declare there is no conflicts of interest

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Diagram of retrieved and selected evidence (anterior lumbar interbody fusion).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. ODI Outcome - Follow-up time of 6 months.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. ODI Outcome - Follow-up time of 12 months.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.. ODI Outcome - Follow-up time of 24 months.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.. Pain outcome (VAS) - Follow-up time of 12 months.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.. Pain outcome (VAS) - Follow-up time of 24 months.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Tung KK, Tseng WC, Wu YC, Chen KH, Pan CC, Lu WX, et al. Comparison of radiographic and clinical outcomes between ALIF, OLIF, and TLIF over 2-year follow-up: a comparative study. J Orthop Surg Res. 2023;18(1):158–158. doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-03652-5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jacob KC, Patel MR, Ribot MA, Parsons AW, Vanjani NN, Pawlowski H, et al. Single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion with posterior instrumentation at L5/S1. World Neurosurg. 2022;157:e111–e122. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.09.108. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kuang L, Wang B, Lü G. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus mini-open anterior lumbar interbody fusion with oblique self-anchored stand-alone cages for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective study with 2-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2017;42(21):E1259–E1265. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002145. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lee CW, Yoon KJ, Ha SS. Which approach is advantageous to preventing development of adjacent segment disease? Comparative Analysis of 3 different lumbar interbody fusion techniques (ALIF, LLIF, and PLIF) in L4-5 spondylolisthesis. World Neurosurg. 2017;105:612–622. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.06.005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lee N, Kim KN, Yi S, Ha Y, Shin DA, Yoon DH, et al. Comparison of outcomes of anterior, posterior, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery at a single lumbar level with degenerative spinal disease. World Neurosurg. 2017;101:216–226. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.01.114. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types