Skip to main content
Log in

Highlighting quality issues in “Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar fusion: a systematic review of complications” by Hu et al

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Archavlis E (2013) Carvi y Nievas M. Comparison of minimally invasive fusion and instrumentation versus open surgery for severe stenotic spondylolisthesis with high-grade facet joint osteoarthritis. Eur Spine J 22(8):1731–1740. doi:10.1007/s00586-013-2732-6

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Hu W, Tang J, Wu X, Zhang L, Ke B (2016) Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar fusion: A systematic review of complications. Int Orthop. doi:10.1007/s00264-016-3153-z

    Google Scholar 

  3. Shunwu F, Xing Z, Fengdong Z, Xiangqian F (2010) Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases. Spine 35(17):1615–1620. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c70fe3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick S. Murray.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Murray, P.S. Highlighting quality issues in “Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar fusion: a systematic review of complications” by Hu et al. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 40, 2207–2208 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3269-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3269-1

Keywords

Navigation