SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000
Surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylosis.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2005Pooled it
- Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Managing Complex and Revision Cases With a Minimally Invasive Approach.Cureus · 2025Article
- The evolution of interlaminar endoscopic spine surgery.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2020Review
- Skipping posterior dynamic transpedicular stabilization for distant segment degenerative disease.Advances in orthopedics · 2012Article
- Kinematic response of lumbar functional spinal units to axial torsion with and without superimposed compression and flexion/extension.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 · 2004Article
- 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.
objectivesDegenerative conditions affecting the lumbar spine are variously described as lumbar spondylosis or degenerative disc disease (which we regarded as one entity) and are associated with back pain, instability, spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of surgical interventions for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylosis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Embase, Biosis, Dissertation Abstracts, Index to UK Thesis, and reference lists of the retrieved articles and we corresponded with experts. All data found up to 31/12/99 are included. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials of surgical treatment of lumbar spondylosis 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
resultsSixteen published trials of all forms of surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spondylosis have been identified. There were many serious weaknesses of trial design, including poor methods of randomisation, lack of blinding and lack of independent assessment of outcome which at times gave considerable potential for bias. Most of the published results were reporting on technical surgical outcomes with some crude ratings of clinical outcome, but few patient-centred outcomes of pain, disability or capacity for work. There was a particular lack of long-term outcomes. This review found no published trials comparing any form of surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylosis compared with natural history, placebo, or any form of conservative treatment. Ten trials randomly compared instrumented and non-instrumented fusion. Instrumented fusion produced a higher fusion rate (though that needs to be qualified by the difficulty of assessing fusion in the presence of metal-work) but did not improve clinical outcomes and there is evidence that it may be associated with higher complication rates. The few and heterogeneous trials on spondylolisthesis, spinal stenosis and nerve compression permitted very limited conclusions. REVIEWER'S
conclusionsThere is no scientific evidence about the effectiveness of any form of surgical decompression or fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylosis compared with natural history, placebo, or conservative treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10908493What 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.