<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "journalpublishing.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xml:lang="EN">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front. Surg.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Surgery</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front. Surg.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">2296-875X</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Media S.A.</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fsurg.2024.1494849</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Surgery</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Original Research</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Risk factors for low back pain after oblique lumbar interbody fusion in patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Shuanchi</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>Jiabao</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref><uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2670402/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name><surname>Lu</surname><given-names>Zhe</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1">&#x002A;</xref><uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2841055/overview" />
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1"><label><sup>1</sup></label><institution>Department of Orthopaedics, Cangzhou Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine</institution>, <addr-line>Cangzhou, Hebei</addr-line>, <country>China</country></aff>
<aff id="aff2"><label><sup>2</sup></label><institution>Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University</institution>, <addr-line>Shijiazhuang</addr-line>, <country>China</country></aff>
<author-notes>
<fn fn-type="edited-by"><p><bold>Edited by:</bold> Gabriel Tender, Louisiana State University, United States</p></fn>
<fn fn-type="edited-by"><p><bold>Reviewed by:</bold> Lukas Rasuli&#x0107;, University of Belgrade, Serbia</p>
<p>Harish Kempegowda, Boston University, United States</p></fn>
<corresp id="cor1"><label>&#x002A;</label><bold>Correspondence:</bold> Zhe Lu <email>2783422426@qq.com</email></corresp>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>06</day><month>01</month><year>2025</year></pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2024</year></pub-date>
<volume>11</volume><elocation-id>1494849</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received"><day>11</day><month>09</month><year>2024</year></date>
<date date-type="accepted"><day>12</day><month>12</month><year>2024</year></date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>&#x00A9; 2025 Wang, Chen and Lu.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2025</copyright-year><copyright-holder>Wang, Chen and Lu</copyright-holder><license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
<p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY)</ext-link>. The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.</p></license>
</permissions>
<abstract><sec><title>Objective</title>
<p>To investigate the risk factors of low back pain after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) in patients with low grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).</p>
</sec><sec><title>Methods</title>
<p>This retrospective study included 116 patients with single-level low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis with low back pain who underwent OLIF surgery in our hospital from December 2017 to October 2020. Demographic, clinical, surgical, and radiological characteristics of this population were analyzed to determine the relationship between these characteristics and the degree of low back pain relief after OLIF.</p>
</sec><sec><title>Results</title>
<p>A total of 116 patients (average age 58.61&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;7.01 years) were included in this study. Among them, 33 patients had poor improvement of low back pain after surgery, and 83 patients had satisfactory effect after surgery with obvious relief of low back pain. Postoperative disc height increase &#x2264;2.5&#x2005;mm (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000) was most correlated with poor improvement of low back pain symptoms after OLIF. The factors positively correlated with poor improvement of low back pain symptoms after OLIF in patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis included the increase of spondylolisthesis grade (OR&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;17.665; 95&#x0025;CI: 3.262&#x2013;95.678 <italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.001), disc height increase &#x2264;2.5&#x2005;mm (OR&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;34.377; 95&#x0025;CI: 5.632&#x2013;209.818 <italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000). The factors negatively correlated with poor improvement of low back pain symptoms after OLIF in patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis included no osteoporosis (OR&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.067; 95&#x0025;CI: 0.013&#x2013;0.350 <italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.001), no cage subsidence (OR&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.208; 95&#x0025;CI: 0.048&#x2013;0.903 <italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.036), duration of preoperative low back pain symptoms &#x2264;36 months (OR&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.045; 95&#x0025;CI: 0.007&#x2013;0.277 <italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.001).</p>
</sec><sec><title>Conclusions</title>
<p>OLIF can significantly improve the low back pain symptoms in patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. High grade of spondylolisthesis before operation, duration of low back pain symptoms more than 36 months, osteoporosis, postoperative cage subsidence, and postoperative segmental disc height improvement less than 2.5&#x2005;mm are risk factors for low back pain after operation.</p>
</sec>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>low back pain</kwd>
<kwd>OLIF</kwd>
<kwd>risk factors</kwd>
<kwd>mild degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis</kwd>
<kwd>prognosis</kwd>
</kwd-group><counts>
<fig-count count="3"/>
<table-count count="5"/>
<equation-count count="0"/>
<ref-count count="49"/>
<page-count count="11"/>
<word-count count="0"/></counts><custom-meta-wrap><custom-meta><meta-name>section-at-acceptance</meta-name><meta-value>Orthopedic Surgery</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-wrap>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body><sec id="s1" sec-type="intro"><title>Introduction</title>
<p>Lumbar spondylolisthesis is a common spinal disease. According to the Wiltse classification system, there are five types: degenerative, dysplastic, traumatic, isthmic lesion and pathological fracture lumbar spondylolisthesis, among which degenerative lesion is one of the most common types (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1</xref>&#x2013;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">3</xref>). The clinical manifestations of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis are usually different, usually including low back pain, radiating pain and numbness of the lower limbs, intermittent claudication, and even lower limb weakness, numbness in the saddle area, bowel and urinary dysfunction caused by traction or compression of the cauda equina nerve. Lumbar pain is the most common symptom of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. These symptoms are usually related to biomechanical instability of the spondylolisthesis site. Spinal instability leads to disc degeneration and lumbar spinal stenosis, which eventually leads to invasion of nerve roots and dural sac. Adult patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis with severe symptoms, serious impact on patients&#x2019; daily life, long duration, and ineffective conservative treatment are usually treated by surgery (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">4</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">5</xref>). At present, various surgical approaches mostly treat low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis by achieving spinal stability, nerve decompression, intervertebral disc space height restoration, and deformity correction (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">6</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>). In order to reduce the complications associated with traditional open surgery, surgeons have developed minimally invasive techniques such as oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF).</p>
<p>OLIF refers to direct access to the responsible intervertebral disc through the retroperitoneal abdominal vascular sheath and the physiological space of the anterior edge of the psoas major muscle, and after resection, the fusion cage is inserted to increase the height of the intervertebral disc, reduce the prolapse of the intervertebral disc, and prolong the hypertrophic ligamentum flavum to achieve indirect decompression and interbody fusion. In OLIF, the large cage is placed from the lateral side of the vertebral body, and the bone graft area is large and the intervertebral space height is restored. OLIF can not only reduce the destruction of bone structure, but also reduce the exposure of spinal canal, avoid the traction of nerve root, reduce the occurrence of cerebrospinal fluid leakage, nerve edema and other related complications, and the long-term fusion rate is also good (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">8</xref>&#x2013;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">12</xref>). Compared with traditional surgery, OLIF also has the advantages of avoiding the destruction of paraspinal muscles, less bleeding, less trauma, and shorter operation time (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">13</xref>).</p>
<p>Low back pain is often the most common symptom of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The symptoms of low back pain are usually related to biomechanical instability of the spondylolisthesis site, intervertebral disc degeneration, damage of the peripheral nerves of the articular process, and aseptic inflammation of the lumbar muscles. The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) consists of 24 questions related to low back pain. To distinguish between other causes of dysfunction, each question was restricted by &#x201C;due to low back pain,&#x201D; making it easy for patients with low back pain to select. The RMDQ was used to evaluate the status of patients with low back pain during the 24&#x2005;h before the test. The problems included 8 aspects: walking, standing, bending down, lying in bed, dressing, sleeping, self-care, and daily activities. Chiarotto A scholar in New Zealand searched 6 commonly used international databases to evaluate the validity of disability in patients with low back pain. The results showed that RMDQ had moderate to excellent validity, and the construct validity was better than ODI. The RMDQ is simple, easy to operate, does not require training for assessor and assessor, and is more sensitive for evaluating patients with mild and moderate dysfunction. Since this study mainly focuses on the risk factors of postoperative low back pain in patients with mild degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, RMDQ can better evaluate patients&#x2019; low back pain (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">14</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">15</xref>).</p>
<p>OLIF surgery can relieve the neurological symptoms of lower limbs through indirect decompression for lumbar degenerative diseases, while the relief of low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis accompanied by obvious low back pain is usually considered to be related to the stability of responsible segments (disc height recovery and effective fusion of intervertebral space) and the recovery of lumbar curvature (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">16</xref>&#x2013;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">18</xref>). However, in clinical cases, many factors such as the severity of spondylolisthesis, osteoporosis, body weight and combined internal fixation devices can affect the recovery of symptoms after OLIF. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of OLIF in the treatment of patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis mainly with low back pain, and to investigate the risk factors affecting the relief of low back pain symptoms after OLIF in patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis mainly with low back pain, so that clinicians can intervene in advance and how to improve the effect of surgery on relieving low back pain symptoms.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2" sec-type="methods"><title>Materials and methods</title>
<sec id="s2a"><title>Study design and patient population</title>
<p>This retrospective clinical study included patients who underwent OLIF surgery due to low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis in our hospital from December 2017 to October 2020. All patients were diagnosed as degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis by x-ray plain film (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">19</xref>). The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) diagnosis of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with low back pain; (2) Grade I and II spondylolisthesis according to Meyerding classification (&#x003C;25&#x0025;&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;50&#x0025;); (3) conservative treatment for more than 6 months; (4) no history of lumbar surgery; (5) follow-up &#x003E;36 months. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients with trauma, reoperation, tumor, infection, congenital deformity, and immune system diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis; (2) LBP or radiculopathy associated with extraspinal causes; (3) patients with high degree of sliding (grade III, IV); (4) other types of lumbar spondylolisthesis; (5) patients who underwent secondary surgery at the same or adjacent level.</p>
<p>Thirty-four patients were lost to follow-up due to the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) before and at least 3 years after surgery in this retrospective study. Eight patients who underwent a second surgery due to infection, poor fusion of the intervertebral space after surgery, acute nerve edema, etc. were excluded from the study. A total of 116 patients (100&#x0025;) were enrolled in this cohort. The patient&#x0027;s age, gender, body mass index, spondylolisthesis grade, spondylolisthesis segment, preoperative hypertension, diabetes and other basic diseases, duration of symptoms, lumbar lordosis Angle, surgical segment lordosis Angle, intervertebral disc height, and whether percutaneous pedicle screw fixation combined with treatment were recorded before operation, before discharge and 3 years after operation.</p>
<p>All patients underwent lateral lumbar x-ray examination in standing position. The preoperative and postoperative lumbar lordosis Angle, segmental lumbar lordosis Angle and intervertebral disc height were measured by four attending doctors with more than 5 years of experience in spine surgery.</p>
<p>Cage subsidence and bone fusion were assessed using three-dimensional thin-slice computed tomography (CT) images and axial, coronal, and sagittal reconstructions obtained at 36 months after surgery. An interbody fusion cage was considered to be present if it sank &#x003E;2&#x2005;mm into the adjacent vertebral body. Bony fusion was defined using the fusion grading system of Bridwell et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">20</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">21</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2b"><title>Clinical and radiological outcome measures</title>
<p>Lumbar lordosis Angle (LL): The lumbar lordosis Angle between the upper endplate of the L1 vertebral body and the upper endplate of the S1 vertebral body was measured, repeated three times and averaged.</p>
<p>Segmental lumbar lordosis Angle (SL): The Angle between the upper endplate line of the upper vertebral body and the lower endplate line of the lower vertebral body at the surgical level, repeated three times and averaged (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">22</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">23</xref>).</p>
<p>Disc height (DH): The height of the intervertebral disc space was obtained from the average of the anterior, middle, and posterior disc heights, which were repeated three times and averaged (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figures&#x00A0;1</xref>, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2</xref>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">24</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F1" position="float"><label>Figure 1</label>
<caption><p><bold>(A)</bold> Sagittal CT imaging three years after OLIF combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF). <bold>(B)</bold> Coronal CT imaging three years after OLIF combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF). <bold>(C)</bold> Transverse CT imaging three years after OLIF combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF).</p></caption>
<graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="fsurg-11-1494849-g001.tif"/>
</fig>
<fig id="F2" position="float"><label>Figure 2</label>
<caption><p>Measurement method. <bold>(D)</bold> the whole lumbar lordotic angle (i) and the segmental lordotic angle (ii). <bold>(E)</bold> Anterior, mid, and posterior margin disc height (a, b, c).</p></caption>
<graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="fsurg-11-1494849-g002.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>The efficacy was evaluated by VAS pain score and RMDQ score.</p>
<p>Preoperative low back pain score: RMDQ and VAS were measured before surgery, not at the first visit.</p>
<p>Postoperative low back pain score: RMDQ and VAS were measured at the third-year follow-up. We evaluated the degree of low back pain in the third year after surgery, not only to reduce the neuromuscular pain caused by the operation, but also to observe the influence of different factors on the degree of low back pain relief after surgery.</p>
<p>Patients with RMDQ improvement rate &#x2265;25&#x0025; and VAS improvement index &#x003E;3 were considered to have good and effective improvement of low back pain after OLIF.</p>
<p>The improvement rate of RMDQ&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;(preoperative RMDQ-postoperative RMDQ)/preoperative RMDQ.</p>
<p>VAS improvement index&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;preoperative VAS- postoperative VAS.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2c"><title>Statistical analysis</title>
<p>All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 26.0. Data are presented as mean SD or <italic>n</italic> (&#x0025;) of patients. Chi-square test, non-parametric test, independent sample T test was used to compare the demographic characteristics and clinical data between groups. Univariate and multivariate unconditional logistic regression were used to estimate crude and adjusted odds ratios and 95&#x0025; confidence intervals, which are measures of association between risk factors and LBP. For correlation analysis, Pearson&#x0027;s correlation coefficient was used to assess the relationship between variables. All reported <italic>P</italic> values are two-sided, and a <italic>P</italic> value of less than 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s3" sec-type="results"><title>Results</title>
<p>This retrospective study recruited 158 patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent OLIF surgery. Of these, 116 completed the final follow-up 36 months after surgery. There were 55 males and 61 females with an average age of 58.61 years (39&#x2013;73 years). The complete follow-up rate was 73.4&#x0025; (116 of 158 patients). Thirty-four patients were lost to follow-up. Eight patients who underwent a second operation due to infection, adjacent stage lesions, acute nerve edema, etc. were excluded from the study.</p>
<p><xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table&#x00A0;1</xref> shows the demographic and diagnostic characteristics of the patients. At the final follow-up, the preoperative and postoperative lumbar lordosis Angle, segmental lumbar lordosis Angle, intervertebral disc height, VAS score, and RMDQ score were compared, and the differences were statistically significant (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05). After OLIF, the mean&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;SD lumbar lordosis Angle changed from 50.00&#x00B0;&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.09&#x00B0; to 52.48&#x00B0;&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.06&#x00B0;, and the mean&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;SD segmental lordosis Angle changed from 13.83&#x00B0;&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.60&#x00B0; to 14.82&#x00B0;&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.58&#x00B0;. The mean&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;SD disc height decreased from 7.53&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.33&#x2005;mm preoperatively to 10.30&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.50&#x2005;mm postoperatively. The mean&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;SD VAS score decreased from 7.32&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.75 preoperatively to 3.48&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.39 at the final follow-up 3 years postoperatively. The mean&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;SD RMDQ score decreased from 14.57&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.91 before surgery to 10.18&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.34 at the final follow-up at 3 years after surgery.</p>
<table-wrap id="T1" position="float"><label>Table 1</label>
<caption><p>The demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with mild isthmus were retrospectively studied.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<colgroup>
<col align="left"/>
<col align="left"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Demographic</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Descriptive</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Study cohort <italic>n</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;116</th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><italic>P</italic> value</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Age (years)</td>
<td valign="top" align="left"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">58.61&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;7.01</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">BMI</td>
<td valign="top" align="left"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">23.59&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.44</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Duration of symptoms (months)</td>
<td valign="top" align="left"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">27.01&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;11.92</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Gender</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">Male</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">55 (47.4&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Female</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">61 (52.6&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Grade of slippage</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">1</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">71 (61.2&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">45 (38.8&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Diabetes</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">39 (33.6&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">77 (66.4&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Hypertension</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">37 (31.9&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">79 (68.1&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Coronary heart disease</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">42 (36.2&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">74 (63.8&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Osteoporosis</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">48 (41.4&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">68 (58.6&#x0025;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Lumbar lordosis Angle (&#x00B0;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">Preoperation</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">50.00&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.09</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Postoperation</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">52.48&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.06</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Segmental lordosis Angle (&#x00B0;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">Preoperation</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">13.83&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.60</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.004</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Postoperation</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.82&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.58</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Disc height changes (mm)</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">Preoperation</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.53&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.33</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Postoperation</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.30&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.50</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">VAS</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">Preoperation</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.32&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.75</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Postoperation</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.48&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.39</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">RMDQ</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">Preoperation</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.57&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.91</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Postoperation</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.18&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.34</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p><xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table&#x00A0;2</xref> shows the relationship between demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics and preoperative VAS pain scores as well as preoperative RMDQ scores. Among the statistical characteristics, we did not find any factor that had a significant difference in both VAS score and RMDQ score. However, the preoperative RMDQ scores of low back pain were significantly different between patients with osteoporosis and patients without osteoporosis (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05), and the preoperative RMDQ scores of L4 segment spondylolisthesis and L2/L3 segment spondylolisthesis were significantly different (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05). There was no significant difference between other factors and preoperative VAS score of low back pain and preoperative RMDQ score.</p>
<table-wrap id="T2" position="float"><label>Table 2</label>
<caption><p>Univariate analysis evaluated the relationship between demographic characteristics, clinical features, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<colgroup>
<col align="left"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Demographic</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Descriptive</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Number of patients</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Pre VAS</th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><italic>P</italic> value</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Pre RMDQ</th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><italic>P</italic> value</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Gender</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Male</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">55</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.38&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.65</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.353</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.44&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.94</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.481</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">Female</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">61</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.26&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.83</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.69&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.89</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Age (years)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;60</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">74</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.32&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.74</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.895</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.58&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.94</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.850</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;60</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">42</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.31&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.78</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.55&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.88</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">BMI</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;24.0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">74</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.31&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.74</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.667</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.65&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.03</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.603</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;24.0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">42</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.33&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.79</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.43&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.70</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Grade of slippage</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">71</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.39&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.71</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.295</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.27&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.99</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.026</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">45</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.20&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.81</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">15.04&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.71</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Slippery segments</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">L4</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">72</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.35&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.75</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.578</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.85&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.90</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.035</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">L2/L3</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">44</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.27&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.76</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.11&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.87</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Diabetes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">39</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.33&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.74</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.793</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.41&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.68</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.504</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">77</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.31&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.77</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.65&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.02</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Hypertension</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">37</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.35&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.75</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.959</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.43&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.92</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.481</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">79</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.30&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.76</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.63&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.92</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Coronary heart disease</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">42</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.33&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.69</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.922</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.62&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.81</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.839</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">74</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.31&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.79</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.54&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.98</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Osteoporosis</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">48</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.29&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.65</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.837</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">15.02&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.83</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.033</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">68</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.82</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.25&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.92</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Duration of symptoms(months)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;36</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">68</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.31&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.83</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.759</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.83&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.74</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.125</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;36</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">48</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7.33&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.63</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">14.38&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.02</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p><xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">Table&#x00A0;3</xref> shows the relationships between demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics and postoperative VAS pain scores as well as postoperative RMDQ scores. Preoperative lumbar spondylolisthesis grade, Cage subsidence, duration of preoperative low back pain symptoms more than 36 months, percutaneous pedicle screw implantation, osteoporosis, postoperative segmental lordosis Angle change &#x003E;0.8&#x00B0;, postoperative intervertebral disc height change &#x003E;2.5&#x2005;mm were significantly correlated with postoperative low back pain VAS score and postoperative RMDQ score Significant difference (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05). When the preoperative grade of lumbar spondylolisthesis is greater, preoperative osteoporosis, postoperative Cage subsidence, preoperative low back pain lasting more than 36 months, no percutaneous pedicle screw implantation, postoperative segmental lordosis Angle change &#x2264;0.8&#x00B0;, postoperative intervertebral disc height change &#x2264;2.5&#x2005;mm, there is no significant difference between the two groups (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003E;&#x2009;0.05). The postoperative VAS score and RMDQ score of patients with low back pain will be higher, and the postoperative recovery of low back pain symptoms will be poor.</p>
<table-wrap id="T3" position="float"><label>Table 3</label>
<caption><p>Univariate analysis evaluated the relationship between demographic characteristics and clinical features, and postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<colgroup>
<col align="left"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Demographic</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Descriptive</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Number of patients</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Post VAS</th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><italic>P</italic> value</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Post RMDQ</th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><italic>P</italic> value</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Gender</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Male</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">55</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.62&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.45</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.310</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.29&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.41</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.585</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">Female</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">61</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.36&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.34</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.08&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.29</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Age (years)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;60</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">74</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.69&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.47</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.047</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.22&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.40</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.706</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;60</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">42</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.12&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.17</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.12&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.25</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">BMI</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;24.0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">74</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.14&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.16</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.002</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.00&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.42</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.264</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;24.0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">42</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">4.10&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.56</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.50&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.19</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Grade of slippage</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">71</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.17&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.15</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.010</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">9.45&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.03</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">45</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.98&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.60</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">11.33&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.35</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Slippery segments</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">L4</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">72</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.43&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.35</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.634</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.43&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.30</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.194</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">L5</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">44</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.57&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.47</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">9.77&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.37</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Amount of bleeding</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;120&#x2005;mml</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">55</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.33&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.25</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.438</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">9.85&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.35</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.105</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;120&#x2005;mml</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">61</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.62&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.51</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.48&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.31</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Operation duration</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;120&#x2005;min</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">44</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.45&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.32</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.881</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.23&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.20</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.770</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;120&#x2005;min</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">72</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.50&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.44</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.15&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.44</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Diabetes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">39</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.69&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.36</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.224</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.18&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.34</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.860</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">77</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.38&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.41</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.17&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.49</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Hypertension</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">37</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.70&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.41</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.267</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.27&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.00</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.674</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">79</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.38&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.38</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.14&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.49</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Coronary heart disease</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">42</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.60&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.33</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.439</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.24&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.13</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.844</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">74</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.42&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.43</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.15&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.46</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Osteoporosis</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">48</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">4.13&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.48</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">11.42&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.23</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">68</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.03&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.13</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">9.31&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.01</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Cage subsidence</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">47</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">4.26&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.51</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">11.49&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.28</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">69</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">2.96&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.02</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">9.29&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.93</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Duration of symptoms (months)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;36</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">68</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.03&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.12</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">9.63&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.18</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;36</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">48</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">4.13&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.50</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.96&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.36</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="3">PPSF</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">75</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.16&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.10</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.006</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">9.56&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.05</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">41</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">4.07&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.66</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">11.32&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.42</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Lumbar lordosis Angle changes (&#x00B0;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">40</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.83&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.60</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.128</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10.75&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.50</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.037</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">76</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.30&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.24</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">9.88&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.21</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Segmental lordosis Angle changes (&#x00B0;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;0.8</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">35</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">4.40&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.52</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">11.17&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.43</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.002</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;0.8</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">81</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.09&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.13</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">9.75&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.18</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Disc height changes (mm)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;2.5</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">35</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">4.26&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.50</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">11.57&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.25</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;2.5</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">81</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.15&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.21</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
<td valign="top" align="center">9.58&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.12</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>Patients with RMDQ improvement rate &#x2265;25&#x0025; and VAS improvement index &#x003E;3 were considered to have good and effective improvement of low back pain after OLIF, and patients with RMDQ improvement rate &#x003C;25&#x0025; or VAS improvement index &#x2264;3 were classified as unsatisfactory improvement of low back pain symptoms after OLIF and poor efficacy group.</p>
<p><xref ref-type="table" rid="T4">Table&#x00A0;4</xref> shows the relationship between demographic characteristics, MRI findings, and efficacy of postoperative LBP improvement. Age &#x003E;60 years (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.015), BMI&#x2009;&#x003E;&#x2009;24&#x2005;kg/m<sup>2</sup> (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000), larger spondylolisthesis grade (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000), osteoporosis (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000), cage subsidence (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000), duration of symptoms &#x003E;36 months (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000), no PPSF(<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000), lumbar lordosis Angle increase &#x2264;2&#x00B0;(<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.003), anterior segment Patients with an increase in convex Angle &#x2264;0.8&#x00B0;(<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000) and an increase in disc height &#x2264;2.5&#x2005;mm (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000) had poor postoperative improvement of low back pain. These factors are possible risk factors for the improvement of low back pain after OLIF.</p>
<table-wrap id="T4" position="float"><label>Table 4</label>
<caption><p>Univariate analysis assesses the relationship between demographic characteristics, magnetic resonance imaging findings, and improvement in postoperative low back pain.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<colgroup>
<col align="left"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Demographic</th>
<th valign="top" align="center" rowspan="2">Descriptive</th>
<th valign="top" align="center" colspan="2">Therapeutic effect</th>
<th valign="top" align="center" rowspan="2"><italic>P</italic> value</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="center">Good 83</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Poor 33</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Gender</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Male</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">37</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">18</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.087</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">Female</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">50</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">11</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Age(years)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;60</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">37</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">5</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.015</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;60</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">50</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">24</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">BMI(kg/m<sup>2</sup>)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;24.0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">64</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;24.0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">23</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">19</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Grade of slippage</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">65</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">6</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">22</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">23</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Slippery segments</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">L4</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">30</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">14</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.194</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">L5</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">57</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">15</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Amount of bleeding (mml)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;120</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">45</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.134</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;120</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">42</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">19</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Operation duration (min)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;120</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">34</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.825</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;120</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">53</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">19</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Diabetes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">29</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">58</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">19</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Hypertension</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">27</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.819</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">60</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">19</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Coronary heart disease</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">32</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">55</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">19</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Osteoporosis</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">24</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">24</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">63</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">5</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Cage subsidence</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">21</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">26</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">66</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Duration of symptoms(months)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;36</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">25</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">23</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;36</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">62</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">6</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">PPSF</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">Yes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">68</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">No</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">19</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">22</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Lumbar lordosis Angle changes (&#x00B0;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">23</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">17</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.003</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">64</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">12</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Segmental lordosis Angle changes (&#x00B0;)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;0.8</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">15</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">20</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;0.8</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">72</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">9</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Disc height changes (mm)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x2264;2.5</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">15</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">20</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">&#x003E;2.5</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">72</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">9</td>
<td valign="top" align="center"/>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>The possible risk factors in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T4">Table&#x00A0;4</xref> that showed a significant difference in the degree of improvement in efficacy were included in the Logistic regression model. In the multivariate analysis (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T5">Table&#x00A0;5</xref>), age, BMI, PPSF, change in lumbar lordosis Angle, and change in lumbar segmental lordosis Angle were removed from the logistic regression model, and slippage grade, osteoporosis, cage subsiding, duration of preoperative low back pain symptoms, and improvement in postoperative intervertebral disc height at the surgical level were considered risk factors associated with improvement in postoperative low back pain symptoms. The increase of slip grade (OR&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;17.665; 95&#x0025;CI: 3.262&#x2013;95.678 <italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.001), disc height increase &#x2264;2.5&#x2005;mm (OR&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;34.377; 95&#x0025; CI: 5.632&#x2013;209.818 <italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.000). No osteoporosis (OR&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.067; 95&#x0025; CI: 0.013&#x2013;0.350 <italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.001), no cage subsidence (OR&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.208; 95&#x0025; CI: 0.048&#x2013;0.903 <italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.036), and the duration of preoperative low back pain symptoms &#x2264;36 months (OR&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.045; 95&#x0025;CI: 0.007&#x2013;0.277 <italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x003D;&#x2009;0.001).</p>
<table-wrap id="T5" position="float"><label>Table 5</label>
<caption><p>Logistic regression was used to analyze independent predictors of low back pain relief after OLIF surgery.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<colgroup>
<col align="left"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left" rowspan="2">Demographic</th>
<th valign="top" align="center" rowspan="2">OR</th>
<th valign="top" align="center" colspan="2">95&#x0025;CI</th>
<th valign="top" align="center" rowspan="2"><italic>P</italic> value</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="center">Lower</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Upper</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Grade of slippage</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">17.665</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">3.262</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">95.678</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Osteoporosis</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.067</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.013</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.350</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Cage subsidence</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.208</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.048</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.903</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.036</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Duration of symptoms</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.045</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.007</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.277</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">Disc height changes</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">34.377</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">5.632</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">209.818</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.000</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>We inverted the OR values of risk factors that were negatively associated with improvement of low back pain after OLIF. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of the 5 risk factors included in the Logistic regression model were drawn by SPSS software to compare and analyze the sensitivity of the 5 risk factors. It can be seen from the figure that the improvement of intervertebral disc height after operation is the most important risk factor for the improvement of low back pain after operation, while the preoperative grade of lumbar spondylolisthesis has the lowest influence on the improvement of low back pain after operation compared with the other four factors (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">Figure&#x00A0;3</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F3" position="float"><label>Figure 3</label>
<caption><p>Comparative analysis of the effects of 5 risk factors (grade of slip, osteoporosis, cage subsidence, duration of symptoms of low back pain before surgery, and height of operative intervertebral disc after surgery) on the improvement of the degree of low back pain after OLIF.</p></caption>
<graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="fsurg-11-1494849-g003.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="s4" sec-type="discussion"><title>Discussion</title>
<p>Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) is considered as a degenerative disease of the elderly, and its incidence is increasing in today&#x0027;s global society. Low back pain is the main symptom of patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">25</xref>), and the discomfort caused by it seriously affects the quality of life of the affected patients. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) also shows some degenerative imbalance and therefore becomes a risk factor for degenerative scoliosis in later life (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">26</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">27</xref>). Lumbar instability is usually the main factor inducing and aggravating low back pain symptoms. OLIF is effective for the treatment of low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. During surgery, cages are used to enlarge degenerative segments and stretch soft tissues such as the ligamentum yelum within the spinal canal, thereby enlarging the volume of the spinal canal and foramina to relieve low back pain (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">28</xref>&#x2013;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">31</xref>). OLIF allows for more complete disc removal, better indirect decompression, greater bone graft area, and allows for larger cage placement in the epiphyseal ring. This is more conducive to postoperative intervertebral fusion, and these advantages reduce the incidence of cage subsidence, thereby alleviating postoperative LBP (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">32</xref>). Effective fusion of unstable segments has been shown to provide effective relief of low back pain symptoms (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">33</xref>). In addition, this surgical approach does not require dissection of paravertebral tissue, and may not involve removal of bone structures near the nerve root canal, such as articular processes. This procedure has less nerve stimulation and avoids the complications of postoperative lower limb pain and numbness caused by intraoperative nerve stimulation.</p>
<p>In our study of 116 patients who underwent OLIF for low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, There were 33 patients who did not achieve satisfactory improvement of low back pain after operation. The factors related to poor improvement of low back pain symptoms after operation included high grade of spondylolisthesis, osteoporosis, cage subsidence, long duration of preoperative low back pain symptoms (&#x003E;36 months), and small increase of intervertebral disc height (&#x2264;2.5&#x2005;mm). The small increase of intervertebral disc height (&#x2264;2.5&#x2005;mm) at the surgical level had the greatest impact on the poor improvement of low back pain symptoms. Studies have found that the loss of lumbar curvature and the change of intervertebral disc height (DH) are closely related to the occurrence and development of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). In addition, other current studies have shown that achieving better disc height (DH) is associated with improvement in postoperative low back pain (LBP), suggesting that regardless of the type of fusion used, surgery should aim to restore disc height to reduce postoperative LBP (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">34</xref>). Sato et al. reported significant improvements in DH and spinal canal area after OLIF surgery. Low back pain and leg pain were significantly reduced (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">35</xref>). This is also consistent with our findings that postoperative disc height recovery is essential for the relief of postoperative low back pain symptoms. It is not only beneficial to restore the patient&#x0027;s original lumbar curvature, but also allows the patient to obtain a better biological force line. It can also effectively expand the height of the intervertebral foramen and relieve the neurological symptoms. In addition, it has been proved that the reconstruction of LL or lumbar segmental lordosis is essential for the recovery of symptoms and the prevention of adjacent segment degeneration even in short-segment surgery (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">36</xref>). However, in our study, the changes of lumbar lordosis Angle and segmental lordosis Angle after operation were significantly different from those before operation. The changes of LL and SL after surgery also make a significant difference in the low back pain scores of patients before and after surgery. In addition, patients with larger and more reasonable changes in LL and SL angles had better relief of low back pain symptoms after surgery, but this factor was not included in our Logistic model and did not become our risk factor. We could then further investigate the relationship between postoperative changes in spine biomechanical Angle and the improvement of outcome in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with low back pain.</p>
<p>After patients undergo OLIF surgery, the stability of the surgical segment is an important rehabilitation indicator of great concern to clinicians (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">37</xref>). In clinical practice, osteoporotic patients with degenerative lumbar diseases usually require OLIF to increase lumbar stability and reduce the risk of fracture and failure. Patients with osteoporosis are often accompanied by the risk of complications such as cage subsidence, internal fixation loosening, and poor interbody fusion after surgery, which lead to low back pain, lower extremity neurological symptoms, and other problems. The effect of surgery is greatly reduced. In addition, due to the low Young&#x0027;s modulus of osteoporotic vertebrae, the difference in mechanical properties between bone and cage leads to increased stress on bone and decreased stress on cage, which indirectly leads to increased risk of cage subsidence. Therefore, the selected fixation system and vertebral strength should be considered when OLIF is performed in osteoporotic patients (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">38</xref>). Studies have shown that patients with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) T scores &#x003C;&#x2212;1.0 undergoing OLIF surgery alone have a higher risk of cage subsidence (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">39</xref>). This has prompted spine surgeons to investigate various methods to alleviate osteoporosis and its various secondary problems. Such as bisphosphonates and recombinant parathyroid hormone to maximize bone quality and surgical outcomes in this patient population (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">40</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">41</xref>). Tu et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">41</xref>) showed that intravenous infusion of zoledronic acid, a bisphosphonate, in patients with lumbar disc herniation after lumbar interbody fusion improved joint fusion rates and clinical outcomes, while reducing the risk of compression fracture, screw loosening, and graft subsidence.</p>
<p>In this study, there was no significant difference in the preoperative VAS score and RMDQ score between patients with preoperative low back pain duration &#x003E;36 months and those with preoperative low back pain duration &#x2264;36 months. However, when evaluating the degree of low back pain after OLIF, it was found that the VAS score and RMDQ score of the patients with the duration of preoperative low back pain symptoms &#x2264;36 months were significantly lower than those of the patients with the duration of preoperative low back pain symptoms &#x003E;36 months after OLIF, and the difference was statistically significant, and the improvement effect of low back pain was better. At present, there are findings suggesting that patients with low back pain symptoms for 3 years have more severe preoperative LBP. Despite their more severe preoperative LBP, they still achieved satisfactory improvement in postoperative LBP. In our study, although there was no significant difference in the preoperative VAS score and RMDQ score between patients with preoperative low back pain duration &#x003E;36 months and those with preoperative low back pain duration &#x2264;36 months, the improvement of low back pain after OLIF was significant regardless of the duration of preoperative low back pain. This part is supported by previous studies by this research group (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">42</xref>).</p>
<p>Cage subsidence after OLIF is very common, with a subsidence rate of about 30&#x0025;, which may affect orthopedic surgery and even lead to decompression failure (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">43</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">44</xref>). Cage subsidence may hinder the effect of indirect decompression through disc height reduction and lead to discomfort, nonfusion, and other negative effects. Intraoperative endplate injury was considered to be a disruption (discontinuity or wear) of the endplates of any one or both adjacent vertebral bodies. Severe endplate injury may occur, followed immediately by intraoperative cage subsidence, cage retropulsion or even vertebral fracture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">45</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">46</xref>). OLIF requires a large interbody fusion cage for indirect decompression. When a larger cage is inserted, the stress between the cage and the endplate surface is more prominent, which is more likely to cause endplate injury during operation. In OLIF, the problem of loss of intervertebral height due to fusion subsidence cannot be avoided. Studies have shown that OLIF&#x2009;&#x002B;&#x2009;PPSF can improve the axial bearing capacity of the fused segment, thereby reducing the incidence of subsidence (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">47</xref>).</p>
<p>In <xref ref-type="table" rid="T4">Table&#x00A0;4</xref>, it can be seen that PPSF is a statistically significant risk factor for the degree of improvement in efficacy. However, it was excluded from the logistic regression model. The application of PPSF mainly improves the symptoms of low back pain (LBP) by increasing the posterior internal fixation, reducing the subsidence of interbody fusion cage, and improving the early fusion rate. For patients with large bone mass, low body weight, and no intraoperative endplate injury, OLIF alone can better restore the patient&#x0027;s biomechanics, lumbar Angle, height, and relatively solid fixation strength, and can provide better surgical results for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. In addition, it can avoid the damage to the back muscles and reduce the symptoms of low back pain caused by muscle damage and other surgical factors in the early postoperative period. It has been reported that both OLIF alone and OLIF combined with PPSF are safe and effective in the treatment of low back pain, especially in patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. For patients with osteoporosis, intraoperative endplate injury, isthmic spondylolisthesis, obesity, and high activity demand, OLIF combined with PPSF is superior to OLIF alone. PPSF is undoubtedly effective in improving spinal stability and reducing the incidence of cage subsidence. For the choice of PPSF, responsible doctors often need to make a comprehensive assessment of patients before making an appropriate decision (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">13</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">39</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">48</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">49</xref>).</p>
<p>The present study has several limitations: (1) The sample size included was small. (2) This study is a retrospective case-control study. Inevitably, there is a certain degree of selection bias that may affect the results. (3) The PPSF group samples were not included in the logistic regression model, which may be due to the small number of patients undergoing PPSF and insufficient sample size, or it may be due to the correlation between this group and the osteoporosis group and the cage subsiding group, which may affect the model.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s5" sec-type="conclusions"><title>Conclusions</title>
<p>The increase of spondylolisthesis grade, osteoporosis, cage subsidence, the duration of preoperative low back pain symptoms &#x003E;36 months, and the increase of intervertebral disc height &#x2264;2.5&#x2005;mm are the influencing factors for the improvement of low back pain symptoms after OLIF for mild degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Among them, the increase of intervertebral disc height &#x2264;2.5&#x2005;mm is the biggest factor affecting the relief of low back pain symptoms after OLIF. Our findings may help surgeons to identify patients at high risk of poor low back pain outcome after OLIF in patients with mild degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, so that they can carry out preoperative intervention in advance of some factors, select appropriate surgical methods, and postoperative rehabilitation methods to reduce or prevent the occurrence of poor low back pain outcome after OLIF, so as to improve surgical outcomes. The purpose of improving patient satisfaction.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<sec id="s6" sec-type="data-availability"><title>Data availability statement</title>
<p>The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s7" sec-type="ethics-statement"><title>Ethics statement</title>
<p>The studies involving humans were approved by Medical Ethics Committee of the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation was not required from the participants or the participants&#x2019; legal guardians/next of kin in accordance with the national legislation and institutional requirements.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s8" sec-type="author-contributions"><title>Author contributions</title>
<p>SW: Writing &#x2013; original draft. JC: Writing &#x2013; original draft. ZL: Writing &#x2013; review &#x0026; editing.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s9" sec-type="funding-information"><title>Funding</title>
<p>The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s10" sec-type="COI-statement"><title>Conflict of interest</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s11" sec-type="disclaimer"><title>Publisher&#x0027;s note</title>
<p>All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.</p>
</sec>
<fn-group>
<title>Abbreviations</title>
<fn fn-type="abbr" id="ab001"><p>OLIF, oblique lumbar interbody fusion; DLS, degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis; RMDQ, Roland-Morris disability questionnaire; ODI, oswestry disability index; LBP, low back pain; PPSF, percutaneous pedicle screw fixation; VAS, visual analogue scale; LL, lumbar lordosis angle; SL, segmental lumbar lordosis angle; DH, disc height.</p></fn>
</fn-group>
<ref-list><title>References</title>
<ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ishihara</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Matsui</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Osada</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Ohshima</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Tsuji</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Facet joint asymmetry as a radiologic feature of lumbar intervertebral disc herniation in children and adolescents</article-title>. <source>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</source>. (<year>1997</year>) <volume>22</volume>(<issue>17</issue>):<fpage>2001</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>4</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00007632-199709010-00012</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9306530</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>X</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhou</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Jiang</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Development and application of oblique lumbar interbody fusion</article-title>. <source>Orthop Surg</source>. (<year>2020</year>) <volume>12</volume>(<issue>2</issue>):<fpage>355</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>65</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/os.12625</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32174024</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bydon</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Alvi</surname><given-names>MA</given-names></name><name><surname>Goyal</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis</article-title>. <source>Neurosurg Clin N Am</source>. (<year>2019</year>) <volume>30</volume>(<issue>3</issue>):<fpage>299</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>304</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.nec.2019.02.003</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31078230</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ekman</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>M&#x00F6;ller</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Hedlund</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The long-term effect of posterolateral fusion in adult isthmic spondylolisthesis: a randomized controlled study</article-title>. <source>Spine J</source>. (<year>2005</year>) <volume>5</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>36</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>44</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.spinee.2004.05.249</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15653083</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>M&#x00F6;ller</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Hedlund</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Surgery versus conservative management in adult isthmic spondylolisthesis</article-title>. <source>Spine</source>. (<year>2000</year>) <volume>25</volume>(<issue>13</issue>):<fpage>1711</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>5</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00007632-200007010-00016</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10870148</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wenger</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Sapio</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Markwalder</surname><given-names>TM</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Long-term outcome in 132 consecutive patients after posterior internal fixation and fusion for grade I and II isthmic spondylolisthesis</article-title>. <source>J Neurosurg Spine</source>. (<year>2005</year>) <volume>2</volume>(<issue>3</issue>):<fpage>289</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>97</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3171/spi.2005.2.3.0289</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15796353</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kwon</surname><given-names>BK</given-names></name><name><surname>Berta</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Daffner</surname><given-names>SD</given-names></name><name><surname>Vaccaro</surname><given-names>AR</given-names></name><name><surname>Hilibrand</surname><given-names>AS</given-names></name><name><surname>Grauer</surname><given-names>JN</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Radiographic analysis of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of adult isthmic spondylolisthesis</article-title>. <source>J Spinal Disord Tech</source>. (<year>2003</year>) <volume>16</volume>(<issue>5</issue>):<fpage>469</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>76</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00024720-200310000-00006</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">14526196</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mummaneni</surname><given-names>PV</given-names></name><name><surname>Haid</surname><given-names>RW</given-names></name><name><surname>Rodts</surname><given-names>GE</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Lumbar interbody fusion: state-of-the-art technical advances</article-title>. <source>J Neurosurg Spine</source>. (<year>2004</year>) <volume>1</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>24</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>30</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3171/spi.2004.1.1.0024</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15291016</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Eck</surname><given-names>JC</given-names></name><name><surname>Hodges</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Humphreys</surname><given-names>SC</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Minimally invasive lumbar spinal fusion</article-title>. <source>J Am Acad Orthop Surg</source>. (<year>2007</year>) <volume>15</volume>(<issue>6</issue>):<fpage>321</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>9</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5435/00124635-200706000-00001</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17548881</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Shen</surname><given-names>FH</given-names></name><name><surname>Samartzis</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Khanna</surname><given-names>AJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Anderson</surname><given-names>DG</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Minimally invasive techniques for lumbar interbody fusions</article-title>. <source>Orthop Clin North Am</source>. (<year>2007</year>) <volume>38</volume>(<issue>3</issue>):<fpage>373</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>86</lpage>. <comment>Abstract vi</comment>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ocl.2007.04.002</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17629985</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kaiser</surname><given-names>MG</given-names></name><name><surname>Haid</surname><given-names>RW</given-names><suffix>Jr</suffix></name><name><surname>Subach</surname><given-names>BR</given-names></name><name><surname>Miller</surname><given-names>JS</given-names></name><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>CD</given-names></name><name><surname>Rodts</surname><given-names>GE</given-names><suffix>Jr</suffix></name></person-group>. <article-title>Comparison of the mini-open versus laparoscopic approach for anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective review</article-title>. <source>Neurosurgery</source>. (<year>2002</year>) <volume>51</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>97</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>105</lpage>. <comment>Discussion 103&#x2013;5</comment>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00006123-200207000-00015</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12182440</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Weinstein</surname><given-names>JN</given-names></name><name><surname>Tosteson</surname><given-names>TD</given-names></name><name><surname>Lurie</surname><given-names>JD</given-names></name><name><surname>Tosteson</surname><given-names>AN</given-names></name><name><surname>Blood</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Hanscom</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis</article-title>. <source>N Engl J Med</source>. (<year>2008</year>) <volume>358</volume>(<issue>8</issue>):<fpage>794</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>810</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1056/NEJMoa0707136</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18287602</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Xiao</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Qi</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Gu</surname><given-names>X</given-names></name><name><surname>Yu</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Oblique lateral interbody fusion stand-alone vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of discogenic low back pain</article-title>. <source>Front Surg</source>. (<year>2022</year>) <volume>9</volume>:<fpage>1013431</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fsurg.2022.1013431</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">36299573</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Roland</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Morris</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>A study of the natural history of back pain. Part I: Development of a Reliable and Sensitive Measure of Disability in low-back pain</article-title>. <source>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</source>. (<year>1983</year>) <volume>8</volume>(<issue>2</issue>):<fpage>141</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>4</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00007632-198303000-00004</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">6222486</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Garg</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Pathak</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Churyukanov</surname><given-names>MV</given-names></name><name><surname>Uppin</surname><given-names>RB</given-names></name><name><surname>Slobodin</surname><given-names>TM</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Low back pain: critical assessment of various scales</article-title>. <source>Eur Spine J</source>. (<year>2020</year>) <volume>29</volume>(<issue>3</issue>):<fpage>503</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>18</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00586-019-06279-5</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31916001</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lee</surname><given-names>GW</given-names></name><name><surname>Son</surname><given-names>JH</given-names></name><name><surname>Ahn</surname><given-names>MW</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>HJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Yeom</surname><given-names>JS</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The comparison of pedicle screw and cortical screw in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a prospective randomized noninferiority trial</article-title>. <source>Spine J</source>. (<year>2015</year>) <volume>15</volume>(<issue>7</issue>):<fpage>1519</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>26</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.spinee.2015.02.038</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25728553</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Allain</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Dufour</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Anterior lumbar fusion techniques: ALIF, OLIF, DLIF, LLIF, IXLIF</article-title>. <source>Orthop Traumatol Surg Res</source>. (<year>2020</year>) <volume>106</volume>(<issue>1s</issue>):<fpage>S149</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>s157</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.otsr.2019.05.024</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31818690</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Verma</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Virk</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Qureshi</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Interbody fusions in the lumbar spine: a review</article-title>. <source>Hss J</source>. (<year>2020</year>) <volume>16</volume>(<issue>2</issue>):<fpage>162</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>7</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11420-019-09737-4</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32523484</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Donnally</surname><given-names>IC</given-names></name><name><surname>Hanna</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Varacallo</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease</article-title>. In: Donnally III CJ, editor. <source>StatPearls</source>. <publisher-loc>Treasure Island, FL</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>StatPearls Publishing LLC</publisher-name> (<year>2024</year>). <comment>Disclosure: Andrew Hanna declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies. Disclosure: Matthew Varacallo declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies</comment>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B20"><label>20.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Beutler</surname><given-names>WJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Peppelman</surname><given-names>WC</given-names><suffix>Jr</suffix></name></person-group>. <article-title>Anterior lumbar fusion with paired BAK standard and paired BAK proximity cages: subsidence incidence, subsidence factors, and clinical outcome</article-title>. <source>Spine J</source>. (<year>2003</year>) <volume>3</volume>(<issue>4</issue>):<fpage>289</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>93</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S1529-9430(03)00061-5</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">14589189</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B21"><label>21.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bridwell</surname><given-names>KH</given-names></name><name><surname>Lenke</surname><given-names>LG</given-names></name><name><surname>McEnery</surname><given-names>KW</given-names></name><name><surname>Baldus</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Blanke</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Anterior fresh frozen structural allografts in the thoracic and lumbar spine. Do they work if combined with posterior fusion and instrumentation in adult patients with kyphosis or anterior column defects?</article-title> <source>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</source>. (<year>1995</year>) <volume>20</volume>(<issue>12</issue>):<fpage>1410</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>8</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00007632-199506020-00014</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">7676341</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B22"><label>22.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Choi</surname><given-names>WS</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>JS</given-names></name><name><surname>Ryu</surname><given-names>KS</given-names></name><name><surname>Hur</surname><given-names>JW</given-names></name><name><surname>Seong</surname><given-names>JH</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L5-S1 through a unilateral approach: technical feasibility and outcomes</article-title>. <source>Biomed Res Int</source>. (<year>2016</year>) <volume>2016</volume>:<fpage>2518394</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1155/2016/2518394</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27433472</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B23"><label>23.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jin</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Jaiswal</surname><given-names>MS</given-names></name><name><surname>Jeun</surname><given-names>SS</given-names></name><name><surname>Ryu</surname><given-names>KS</given-names></name><name><surname>Hur</surname><given-names>JW</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>JS</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Outcomes of oblique lateral interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disease in patients under or over 65 years of age</article-title>. <source>J Orthop Surg Res</source>. (<year>2018</year>) <volume>13</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>38</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s13018-018-0740-2</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29463273</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B24"><label>24.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Inoue</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Ohmori</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Miyasaka</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Hosoe</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Radiographic evaluation of the lumbosacral disc height</article-title>. <source>Skeletal Radiol</source>. (<year>1999</year>) <volume>28</volume>(<issue>11</issue>):<fpage>638</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>43</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s002560050566</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10591927</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B25"><label>25.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Liang</surname><given-names>HF</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>SH</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>ZX</given-names></name><name><surname>Fei</surname><given-names>QM</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Decompression plus fusion versus decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis</article-title>. <source>Eur Spine J</source>. (<year>2017</year>) <volume>26</volume>(<issue>12</issue>):<fpage>3084</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>95</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00586-017-5200-x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28647763</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B26"><label>26.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Oliveira</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Marchi</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Coutinho</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Pimenta</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>A radiographic assessment of the ability of the extreme lateral interbody fusion procedure to indirectly decompress the neural elements</article-title>. <source>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</source>. (<year>2010</year>) <volume>35</volume>(<issue>26 Suppl</issue>):<fpage>S331</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>7</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182022db0</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21160397</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B27"><label>27.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fujibayashi</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Hynes</surname><given-names>RA</given-names></name><name><surname>Otsuki</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Kimura</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Takemoto</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Matsuda</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Effect of indirect neural decompression through oblique lateral interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disease</article-title>. <source>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</source>. (<year>2015</year>) <volume>40</volume>(<issue>3</issue>):<fpage>E175</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>82</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/BRS.0000000000000703</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25394317</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B28"><label>28.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chandra</surname><given-names>V</given-names></name><name><surname>Singh</surname><given-names>RK</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Anterior lumbar inter-body fusion with instrumentation compared with posterolateral fusion for low grade isthmic-spondylolisthesis</article-title>. <source>Acta Orthop Belg</source>. (<year>2016</year>) <volume>82</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>23</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>30</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26984651</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B29"><label>29.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lin</surname><given-names>GX</given-names></name><name><surname>Akbary</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Kotheeranurak</surname><given-names>V</given-names></name><name><surname>Quillo-Olvera</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Jo</surname><given-names>HJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>XW</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Clinical and radiologic outcomes of direct versus indirect decompression with lumbar interbody fusion: a matched-pair comparison analysis</article-title>. <source>World Neurosurg</source>. (<year>2018</year>) <volume>119</volume>:<fpage>e898</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>909</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.wneu.2018.08.003</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">30099187</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B30"><label>30.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Woods</surname><given-names>KR</given-names></name><name><surname>Billys</surname><given-names>JB</given-names></name><name><surname>Hynes</surname><given-names>RA</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Technical description of oblique lateral interbody fusion at L1-L5 (OLIF25) and at L5-S1 (OLIF51) and evaluation of complication and fusion rates</article-title>. <source>Spine J</source>. (<year>2017</year>) <volume>17</volume>(<issue>4</issue>):<fpage>545</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>53</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.spinee.2016.10.026</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27884744</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B31"><label>31.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gragnaniello</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Seex</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Anterior to psoas (ATP) fusion of the lumbar spine: evolution of a technique facilitated by changes in equipment</article-title>. <source>J Spine Surg</source>. (<year>2016</year>) <volume>2</volume>(<issue>4</issue>):<fpage>256</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>65</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.21037/jss.2016.11.02</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28097242</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B32"><label>32.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Shasti</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Koenig</surname><given-names>SJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Nash</surname><given-names>AB</given-names></name><name><surname>Bahrami</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Jauregui</surname><given-names>JJ</given-names></name><name><surname>O&#x0027;Hara</surname><given-names>NN</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Biomechanical evaluation of lumbar lateral interbody fusion for the treatment of adjacent segment disease</article-title>. <source>Spine J</source>. (<year>2019</year>) <volume>19</volume>(<issue>3</issue>):<fpage>545</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>51</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.spinee.2018.09.002</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">30201269</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B33"><label>33.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bohl</surname><given-names>MA</given-names></name><name><surname>Hlubek</surname><given-names>RJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Turner</surname><given-names>JD</given-names></name><name><surname>Reece</surname><given-names>EM</given-names></name><name><surname>Kakarla</surname><given-names>UK</given-names></name><name><surname>Chang</surname><given-names>SW</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Novel surgical treatment strategies for unstable lumbar osteodiscitis: a 3-patient case series</article-title>. <source>Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown)</source>. (<year>2018</year>) <volume>14</volume>(<issue>6</issue>):<fpage>639</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>46</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/ons/opx162</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28961732</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B34"><label>34.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Guan</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Yin</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhu</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Z</given-names></name><name><surname>Gao</surname><given-names>Q</given-names></name><name><surname>Shao</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Risk factors of postoperative low back pain for low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study</article-title>. <source>J Int Med Res</source>. (<year>2020</year>) <volume>48</volume>(<issue>3</issue>):<fpage>300060519890791</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/0300060519890791</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31852286</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B35"><label>35.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sato</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Ohtori</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Orita</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Yamauchi</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Eguchi</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Ochiai</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Radiographic evaluation of indirect decompression of mini-open anterior retroperitoneal lumbar interbody fusion: oblique lateral interbody fusion for degenerated lumbar spondylolisthesis</article-title>. <source>Eur Spine J</source>. (<year>2017</year>) <volume>26</volume>(<issue>3</issue>):<fpage>671</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>8</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00586-015-4170-0</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26245906</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B36"><label>36.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hsu</surname><given-names>HT</given-names></name><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>SS</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>TY</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The correlation between restoration of lumbar lordosis and surgical outcome in the treatment of low-grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal fusion</article-title>. <source>Clin Spine Surg</source>. (<year>2016</year>) <volume>29</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>E16</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>20</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/BSD.0000000000000061</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24335721</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B37"><label>37.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Z</given-names></name><name><surname>Fogel</surname><given-names>GR</given-names></name><name><surname>Liao</surname><given-names>Z</given-names></name><name><surname>Sun</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Biomechanical analysis of lateral lumbar interbody fusion constructs with Various fixation options: based on a validated finite element model</article-title>. <source>World Neurosurg</source>. (<year>2018</year>) <volume>114</volume>:<fpage>e1120</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>9</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.wneu.2018.03.158</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29609081</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B38"><label>38.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>ZX</given-names></name><name><surname>Gao</surname><given-names>ZW</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>ZY</given-names></name><name><surname>Cai</surname><given-names>XY</given-names></name><name><surname>Ren</surname><given-names>YN</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Effects of osteoporosis on the biomechanics of various supplemental fixations co-applied with oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF): a finite element analysis</article-title>. <source>BMC Musculoskelet Disord</source>. (<year>2022</year>) <volume>23</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>794</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12891-022-05645-7</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">35986271</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B39"><label>39.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tempel</surname><given-names>ZJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Gandhoke</surname><given-names>GS</given-names></name><name><surname>Okonkwo</surname><given-names>DO</given-names></name><name><surname>Kanter</surname><given-names>AS</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Impaired bone mineral density as a predictor of graft subsidence following minimally invasive transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion</article-title>. <source>Eur Spine J</source>. (<year>2015</year>) <volume>24</volume>(<issue>Suppl 3</issue>):<fpage>414</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>9</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00586-015-3844-y</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25739988</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B40"><label>40.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tu</surname><given-names>CW</given-names></name><name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>KF</given-names></name><name><surname>Hsu</surname><given-names>HT</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>HY</given-names></name><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>SS</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>YC</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Zoledronic acid infusion for lumbar interbody fusion in osteoporosis</article-title>. <source>J Surg Res</source>. (<year>2014</year>) <volume>192</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>112</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>6</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jss.2014.05.034</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24948545</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B41"><label>41.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ohtori</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Inoue</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Orita</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Yamauchi</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Eguchi</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Ochiai</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Comparison of teriparatide and bisphosphonate treatment to reduce pedicle screw loosening after lumbar spinal fusion surgery in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis from a bone quality perspective</article-title>. <source>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</source>. (<year>2013</year>) <volume>38</volume>(<issue>8</issue>):<fpage>E487</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>92</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/BRS.0b013e31828826dd</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23354115</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B42"><label>42.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fan</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Gu</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhu</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Guan</surname><given-names>X</given-names></name><name><surname>Hu</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>X</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for isthmic spondylolisthesis: <italic>in situ</italic> versus reduction</article-title>. <source>World Neurosurg</source>. (<year>2016</year>) <volume>90</volume>:<fpage>580</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>587.e1</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.wneu.2016.02.033</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26915276</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B43"><label>43.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Xie</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>X</given-names></name><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>Z</given-names></name><name><surname>Pu</surname><given-names>X</given-names></name><name><surname>Lu</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Clinical and radiological evaluation of cage subsidence following oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with anterolateral fixation</article-title>. <source>BMC Musculoskelet Disord</source>. (<year>2022</year>) <volume>23</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>214</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12891-022-05165-4</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">35248042</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B44"><label>44.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Phan</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Maharaj</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Assem</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Mobbs</surname><given-names>RJ</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Review of early clinical results and complications associated with oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF)</article-title>. <source>J Clin Neurosci</source>. (<year>2016</year>) <volume>31</volume>:<fpage>23</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>9</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jocn.2016.02.030</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27349468</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B45"><label>45.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sharma</surname><given-names>AK</given-names></name><name><surname>Kepler</surname><given-names>CK</given-names></name><name><surname>Girardi</surname><given-names>FP</given-names></name><name><surname>Cammisa</surname><given-names>FP</given-names></name><name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>RC</given-names></name><name><surname>Sama</surname><given-names>AA</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Lateral lumbar interbody fusion: clinical and radiographic outcomes at 1 year: a preliminary report</article-title>. <source>J Spinal Disord Tech</source>. (<year>2011</year>) <volume>24</volume>(<issue>4</issue>):<fpage>242</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>50</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181ecf995</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B46"><label>46.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tohmeh</surname><given-names>AG</given-names></name><name><surname>Khorsand</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Watson</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Zielinski</surname><given-names>X</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Radiographical and clinical evaluation of extreme lateral interbody fusion: effects of cage size and instrumentation type with a minimum of 1-year follow-up</article-title>. <source>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</source>. (<year>2014</year>) <volume>39</volume>(<issue>26</issue>):<fpage>E1582</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>91</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/BRS.0000000000000645</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25341985</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B47"><label>47.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhou</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Guo</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Han</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Lin</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Clinical, radiographic and fusion comparison of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) stand-alone and OLIF with posterior pedicle screw fixation in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis</article-title>. <source>BMC Musculoskelet Disord</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>24</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>852</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12891-023-06985-8</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">37899456</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B48"><label>48.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>He</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>He</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Sun</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Xing</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Wen</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Quantitative analysis of paraspinal muscle atrophy after oblique lateral interbody fusion alone vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in patients with spondylolisthesis</article-title>. <source>BMC Musculoskelet Disord</source>. (<year>2020</year>) <volume>21</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>30</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12891-020-3051-9</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31937277</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B49"><label>49.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>He</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>He</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Sun</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Xing</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Wen</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><etal/></person-group> <article-title>Standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. Combined with percutaneous pedicle screw in spondylolisthesis</article-title>. <source>BMC Musculoskelet Disord</source>. (<year>2020</year>) <volume>21</volume>(<issue>1</issue>):<fpage>184</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12891-020-03192-7</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32293389</pub-id></citation></ref></ref-list>
</back>
</article>