SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000
Surgery for lumbar disc prolapse.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2007Pooled it
- Outcome of invasive treatment modalities on back pain and sciatica: an evidence-based review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2006Review
- Low Back Pain.Current treatment options in neurology · 2001Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical investigations and interventions account for as much as one third of the health care costs for spinal disorders, but the scientific evidence for most procedures is still unclear.
objectivesThe primary rationale for surgery for disc prolapse is to relieve nerve root irritation or compression due to herniated disc material. Claims of the merits of alternative surgical procedures are made without clear evidence about clinical outcomes. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of surgical interventions for the treatment of lumbar disc prolapse. SEARCH STRATEGY: We have searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Embase, Biosis, Dissertation Abstracts, Index to UK Thesis, and reference lists of the retrieved articles. We have also sought trials from expert spinal surgeons and other health workers by direct contact. All data found up to 31/12/99 are included. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of the surgical management of lumbar disc prolapse. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data from published papers. Additional information was sought from the authors if necessary. MAIN
resultsTwenty-seven trials have now been found. There were methodological weaknesses in many of the trials. Sixteen of the 27 trials were of some form of chemonucleolysis. Eleven trials compared different surgical techniques, although only one of these compared surgical discectomy with conservative management. Surgical discectomy produced better clinical outcomes than chemonucleolysis with chymopapain, and chemonucleolysis produced better clinical outcomes than placebo. Three trials showed no difference in clinical outcomes between microdiscectomy and standard discectomy. A recent trial suggests that an inter-position gel covering the spinal dura after discectomy may reduce scar formation, although both this trial and two others failed to show any definite improvement in clinical outcomes. Three trials of percutaneous discectomy provided moderate evidence that it produces poorer clinical outcomes than standard discectomy or chymopapain. We found no published randomised trials of laser discectomy. REVIEWER'S
conclusionsChemonucleolysis is more effective than placebo and it is less invasive, but less effective than surgical disectomy. Surgical discectomy for carefully selected patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc prolapse provides faster relief from the acute attack than conservative management, although any positive or negative effects on the lifetime natural history of the underlying disc disease are unclear.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10908492What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.