Trial reportEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2014
Clinical assessment of reformed lumbar microdiscectomy.
Trial report in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between MRI findings and clinical outcomes in a period of 5 years after lumbar spine microdiscectomy.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2020Observational
- Clinical outcomes after lumbar spine microdiscectomy: a 5-year follow-up prospective study in 100 patients.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of the reformed lumbar microdiscectomy preserving more ligamentum flavum than the traditional microdiscectomy does. A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study was conducted. Patients with unilateral lumbar disc herniation were randomly divided into two groups. The control group underwent traditional lumbar microdiscectomy, and the test group patients underwent the same procedure but with a curved incision of the lumbodorsal fascia and with more preservation of the ligamentum flavum. Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores and Oswestry scale scores were used to appraise the outcomes. Both groups' clinical parameters were significantly improved after the operation. The VAS scores in the test group showed a less intensity than that in the control group at 3 days, 12 weeks after the operation (P < 0.05), while at 1 year, showed no significant difference. Both groups' postoperative leg pain was significantly relieved (P < 0.05). The VAS scores for leg pain had no significant difference between the two groups at any testing time point after the surgery (P > 0.05). The Oswestry scale scores showed a better lumbar function state in the test group than that in the control group at 12 weeks and 1 year after the operation (P < 0.05). In both groups, there was no patient who had a lumbar disc reherniation. Preserving more ligamentum flavum is helpful to improve the clinical outcomes, and this improvement maybe resulted from the prevention of the fibrosis-related complication and the stability of the spine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.