Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF) surgery has received increasing attention in research. This study investigates the global status and trends in this field. LLIF literature publications from January 1, 1900, to August 1, 2023, were identified from the Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded database. Bibliometric methods were used for studying and indexing the source data. VOSviewer version 1.6.19 software was used for co-authorship, co-occurrence analysis, bibliographic coupling, and co-citation analysis of LLIF studies to analyze the overall trend of LLIF research in recent years. A total of 1808 articles were identified. The number of global research and publications on LLIF is increasing every year. The United States is the leading contributor to global LLIF research, with the most citations and the highest h-index. Spine and World Neurosurgery have the highest number of publications. The top four institutions with the greatest contribution are the Hospital for Special Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, St Joseph Hospital, and Rush University. The research can be categorized into three areas: complications, vertebral fusion, and surgical procedures. Postoperative complications are predicted to be the upcoming focus in this field. The number of LLIF-related publications is predicted to continue increasing based on current global research trends. Currently, the United States is the leading contributor in this field of research. Most research will focus on clinical studies, particularly postoperative complications in LLIF, which may emerge as the next significant area of study in the LLIF research field.

Hualv Liu, Changsheng Liao, Weiwei Wang, Shilei Qin, Pengfei Han, Yunfeng Xu. Global research trends in lumbar lateral interbody fusion (LLIF): a bibliometric and visualization study. International Journal of Frontiers in Medicine (2023), Vol. 5, Issue 10: 6-16. https://doi.org/10.25236/IJFM.2023.051002.

[1] Ng C L L, Pang B C, Medina P J A, et al. The learning curve of lateral access lumbar interbody fusion in an asian population: a prospective study[J]. European Spine Journal, 2015, 24: S361–S368. DOI:10.1007/s00586-015-3876-3.

[2] Nie J W W, Hartman T J J, Zheng E, et al. Postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing mis-tlif versus llif for adjacent segment disease[J]. Acta Neurochirurgica, 2023, 165(7): 1907–1914. DOI:10.1007/s00701-023-05629-z.

[3] Lykissas M G, Aichmair A, Hughes A P, et al. Nerve injury after lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a review of 919 treated levels with identification of risk factors[J]. Spine Journal, 2014, 14(5): 749–758. DOI:10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.066.

[4] Nakashima H, Kanemura T, Satake K, et al. Unplanned second-stage decompression for neurological deterioration caused by central canal stenosis after indirect lumbar decompression surgery [J]. Asian Spine Journal, 2019, 13(4): 584–591. DOI:10.31616/asj.2018.0232.

[5] Teng I, Han J, Phan K, et al. A meta-analysis comparing alif, plif, tlif and llif[J]. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, 2017, 44: 11–17. DOI:10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.013.

[6] Rabau O, Navarro-Ramirez R, Aziz M, et al. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (llif): an update [J]. Global Spine Journal, 2020, 10: 17S-21S. DOI:10.1177/2192568220910707.

[7] Oezel L, Okano I, Hughes A P, et al. Longitudinal trends of patient demographics and morbidity of different approaches in lumbar interbody fusion: an analysis using the american college of surgeons national surgical quality improvement program database[J]. World Neurosurgery, 2022, 164: E183–E193. DOI:10.1016/j.wneu. 2022.04.067.

[8] Zhang Y, Hu M, Zhao W, et al. A bibliometric analysis of artificial intelligence applications in spine care[J/OL]. Journal of Neurological Surgery Part A-Central European Neurosurgery, 2023[2023–09–06]. https://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ ejournals/abstract/ 10. 1055/a-2013-3149. DOI:10.1055/ a-2013-3149.

[9] Lepard J R, Walters B C. A bibliometric analysis of neurosurgical practice guidelines[J]. Neurosurgery, 2020, 86(5): 605–614. DOI:10.1093/neuros/nyz240.

[10] Yang Z, Lin J, Li H, et al. Bibliometric and visualization analysis of macrophages associated with osteoarthritis from 1991 to 2021 [J]. Frontiers in Immunology, 2022, 13: 1013498. DOI:10. 3389/fimmu. 2022.1013498.

[11] Lee H J, Lee S-J, Jung J, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of lateral lumbar interbody fusion with various fixation options for adjacent segment degeneration: a finite element analysis[J]. World Neurosurgery, 2023, 173: E156–E167. DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2023.02.023.

[12] Huang T, Zhong W, Lu C, et al. Visualized analysis of global studies on cervical spondylosis surgery: a bibliometric study based on web of science database and vosviewer [J]. Indian Journal of Orthopaedics, 2022, 56(6): 996–1010. DOI:10.1007/s43465-021-00581-5.

[13] Martin J T, Gullbrand S E, Fields A J, et al. Publication trends in spine research from 2007 to 2016: comparison of the orthopaedic research society spine section and the international society for the study of the lumbar spine[J]. Jor Spine, 2018, 1(1): e1006. DOI:10.1002/jsp2.1006.

[14] Ghazavi R, Taheri B, Ashrafi-Rizi H. Article quality indicator: proposing a new indicator for measuring article quality in scopus and web of science [J]. Journal of Scientometric Research, 2019, 8(1): 9–17. DOI:10.5530/jscires.8.1.2.

[15] Ayaz S, Masood N, Islam M A. Predicting scientific impact based on h-index [J]. Scientometrics, 2018, 114(3): 993–1010. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2618-1.

[16] Alas H, Pierce K E, Brown A, et al. Sports-related cervical spine fracture and spinal cord injury a review of nationwide pediatric trends [J]. Spine, 2021, 46(1): 22–28. DOI: 10.1097/BRS. 0000000000003718.

[17] Porto G B F, Wessell J, Alvarado A, et al. Anticoagulation and spine surgery [J]. Global Spine Journal, 2020, 10: 53S-64S. DOI:10.1177/2192568219852051.

[18] Loan F A, Nasreen N, Bashir B. Do authors play fair or manipulate google scholar h-index?[J]. Library Hi Tech, 2022, 40(3): 676–684. DOI: 10.1108/LHT-04-2021-0141.

[19] Zhang R, Lin J, Chen F, et al. Worldwide trends of research on periprosthetic osteolysis: a bibliometric study based on vosviewer [J]. Indian Journal of Orthopaedics, 2021, 55(5): 1326–1334. DOI:10.1007/s43465-021-00462-x.

[20] Yingsakmongkol W, Laokomen S, Jitpakdee K, et al. Predictive parameters for successful indirect decompression of the lateral lumbar interbody fusion (llif) surgery[J]. Interdisciplinary Neurosurgery-Advanced Techniques and Case Management, 2022, 30: 101625. DOI:10.1016/j.inat. 2022.101625.

[21] Xie L, Chen Z, Wang H, et al. Bibliometric and visualized analysis of scientific publications on atlantoaxial spine surgery based on web of science and vosviewer[J]. World Neurosurgery, 2020, 137: 435-+. DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2020.01.171.

[22] Godolias P, Tataryn Z L, Frieler S, et al. Complication rates following stand-alone lateral interbody fusion: a single institution series after 10 years of experience[J]. European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery And Traumatology, 2023, 33(5): 2121–2127. DOI:10.1007/s00590-022-03408-7.

[23] Amaral R, Pokorny G, Marcelino F, et al. Lateral versus posterior approaches to treat degenerative lumbar pathologies-systematic review and meta-analysis of recent literature[J]. European Spine Journal, 2023, 32(5): 1655–1677. DOI:10.1007/s00586-023-07619-2.

[24] Yuen J. Comparison of impact factor, eigenfactor metrics, and scimago journal rank indicator and h-index for neurosurgical and spinal surgical journals [J]. World Neurosurgery, 2018, 119: E328–E337. DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.07.144.

[25] Nolte M T, Gandhi S D, Nguyen A Q, et al. Rates of postoperative complications and approach-related neurological symptoms after l4-l5 lateral transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion compared with upper lumbar levels[J]. Clinical Spine Surgery, 2023, 36(7): E294–E299. DOI:10.1097/ BSD. 0000000000001367.

[26] Ricciardi L, Piazza A, Capobianco M, et al. Lumbar interbody fusion using oblique (olif) and lateral (llif) approaches for degenerative spine disorders: a meta-analysis of the comparative studies[J]. European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, 2023, 33(1): 1–7. DOI:10.1007/s00590-021-03172-0.

[27] Boonsirikamchai W, Phisalpapra P, Kositamongkol C, et al. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (llif) reduces total lifetime cost compared with posterior lumbar interbody fusion (plif) for single-level lumbar spinal fusion surgery: a cost-utility analysis in thailand [J]. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery And Research, 2023, 18(1): 115. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-03588-w.

[28] Lambrechts M J, Siegel N, Heard J C, et al. Trends in single-level lumbar fusions over the past decade using a national database[J]. World Neurosurgery, 2022, 167: E61–E69. DOI: 10. 1016/j. wneu. 2022.07.092.

[29] Akosman I, Kumar N, Mortenson R, et al. Racial differences in perioperative complications, readmissions, and mortalities after elective spine surgery in the united states: a systematic review using ai-assisted bibliometric analysis[J/OL]. Global Spine Journal, 2023[2023–09–06]. https://journals. sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21925682231186759. DOI: 10.1177/21925682231186759.

[30] Li J, Li H, Zhang N, et al. Radiographic and clinical outcome of lateral lumbar interbody fusion for extreme lumbar spinal stenosis of schizas grade d: a retrospective study [J]. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2020, 21(1): 259. DOI:10.1186/s12891-020-03282-6.