Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24722785›Full record

SynthesisInternational orthopaedics2014

The safety and efficacy of minimally invasive discectomy: a meta-analysis of prospective randomised controlled trials.

Xian Chang, Bin Chen, Hai-yin Li, Xiao-bo Han, Yue Zhou, Chang-qing Li

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International orthopaedics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Complication rates of different discectomy techniques for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a network meta-analysis.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 · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. [Efficacy of the far lateral Key-hole technique in the treatment of central cervical disc herniation].Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Does minimally invasive spine surgery reduce the rate of perioperative medical complications? A retrospective single-center experience of 1435 degenerative lumbar spine surgeries.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 · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xian ChangDepartment of Orthopedics, Xinqiao Hospital, The Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, 400037, People's Republic of China.
Bin Chen
Hai-yin Li
Xiao-bo Han
Yue Zhou
Chang-qing Li
Army Medical University · CNXinqiao Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe objective of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive discectomy (MID) with standard discectomy (SD) and determine whether the use of the MID technique could decrease the recurrence of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) after the surgery.

methodsIn February 2014, a comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and the Chinese Biological Medicine Database. Only randomised controlled trials (RCT) that compared MID with SD for the surgical management of LDH were included. These trials were carefully picked out following the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Using the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines, two authors independently extracted data and assessed these trials' quality. The age of the patients, size of incision, surgical time, blood loss, visual analogue scale (VAS) score after the surgery, hospital stay, disc herniation recurrence, X-ray exposure and surgical costs in these studies were abstracted and synthesised by a meta-analysis with RevMan 5.2.0 software, and the main results (VAS score after the surgery and disc herniation recurrence) of publication bias were examined by Stata 12.0.

resultsOverall, 16 trials involving 2,139 patients meeting our criteria were included and analysed. Comparing MID and SD, the former was more likely to increase disc herniation recurrence [relative risk (RR) = 1.95, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.19-3.19, p = 0.008], and it involved a smaller size of incision [mean difference (MD) = -1.91, 95 % CI -3.33 to -0.50, p = 0.008], shorter hospital stay, longer operating time (MD = 11.03, 95 %C I 6.62-15.44, p < 0.00001) and less blood loss (MD = -13.56, 95 % CI -22.26 to -4.87, p = 0.002), while no statistical difference appeared with regard to the age of the patients, VAS score after the surgery, X-ray exposure, hospital stay and surgical costs.

conclusionsBased on available evidence, MID results in less suffering for patients during the hospital course with a similar clinical efficacy compared to SD. This makes MID a promising procedure for patients with LDH; however, to popularise it greater effort is required to reduce disc herniation recurrence.

Indexed as

Lumbar VertebraeDiskectomyHumansIntervertebral Disc DisplacementMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecurrenceTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24722785
PMCPMC4037525
OpenAlexW1975791755

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.