Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25396104›Full record

ArticleGlobal spine journal2014

Lumbar disk herniation surgery: outcome and predictors.

Mahsa Sedighi, Ali Haghnegahdar

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global spine journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07604844 (Comparative Efficacy of Intralesional Tranexamic Acid Versus Mandelic Acid Peel in the Treatment of Melasma), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07604844 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Comparative Efficacy of Intralesional Tranexamic Acid Versus Mandelic Acid Peel in the Treatment of Melasma

TypeinterventionalSponsorCombined Military Hospital AbbottabadRan2026 to 2026Enrolled120ConditionsMelasmaArmsMandelic Acid Peel, Intralesional Tranexamic Acid
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. A comparison of sciatica in young subjects and elderly person.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mahsa SedighiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Neurospine Section, Chamran Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS), Shiraz, Iran.
Ali HaghnegahdarDepartment of Neurosurgery, Neurospine Section, Chamran Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS), Shiraz, Iran ; Department of Trauma Research Center (TRC), Rajaee Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS), Shiraz, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Study Design A retrospective cohort study. Objectives To determine the outcome and any differences in the clinical results of three different surgical methods for lumbar disk herniation and to assess the effect of factors that could predict the outcome of surgery. Methods We evaluated 148 patients who had operations for lumbar disk herniation from March 2006 to March 2011 using three different surgical techniques (laminectomy, microscopically assisted percutaneous nucleotomy, and spinous process osteotomy) by using Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire, Resumption of Activities of Daily Living scale and changes of visual analog scale (VAS) for low back pain and radicular pain. Our study questionnaire addressed patient subjective satisfaction with the operation, residual complaints, and job resumption. Data were analyzed with SPSS version 16.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, United States). Statistical significance was set at 0.05. For statistical analysis, chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and repeated measure analysis were performed. For determining the confounding factors, univariate analysis by chi-square test was used and followed by logistic regression analysis. Results Ninety-four percent of our patients were satisfied with the results of their surgeries. VAS documented an overall 93.3% success rate for reduction of radicular pain. Laminectomy resulted in better outcome in terms of JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire. The outcome of surgery did not significantly differ by age, sex, level of education, preoperative VAS for back, preoperative VAS for radicular pain, return to previous job, or level of herniation. Conclusion Surgery for lumbar disk herniation is effective in reducing radicular pain (93.4%). All three surgical approaches resulted in significant decrease in preoperative radicular pain and low back pain, but intergroup variation in the outcome was not achieved. As indicated by JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire-Low Back Pain (JOABPQ-LBP) and lumbar function functional scores, laminectomy achieved significantly better outcome compared with other methods. It is worth mentioning that relief of radicular pain was associated with subjective satisfaction with the surgery among our study population. Predictive factors for ineffective surgical treatment for lumbar disk herniation were female sex and negative preoperative straight leg raising. Age, level of education, and preoperative VAS for low back pain were other factors that showed prediction power.

Indexed as

lumbar disk herniationoutcomepredictorssurgery

Identifiers

PMID25396104
PMCPMC4229371

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.