Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29273659›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2017

PTED study: design of a non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) versus open microdiscectomy for patients with a symptomatic lumbar disc herniation.

Ankie Seiger, Pravesh S Gadjradj, Biswadjiet S Harhangi, Job Lc van Susante, Wilco C Peul, Maurits W van Tulder, Michiel R de Boer, Sidney M Rubinstein

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readEquivalence TrialMulticenter StudyPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02602093 (), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

NCT02602093 naunknown statusnot on this map

(Cost) Effectiveness of Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy vs. Open Microdiscectomy for Patients With Symptomatic Lumbar Disc Herniation

TypeinterventionalSponsorAmsterdam UMC, location VUmcRan2016 to 2024Enrolled682ConditionsLumbar Disk HerniationArmsTransforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy, Open Microdiscectomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Comparison Between Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy and Fenestration in the Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy in a nine-year-old patient with sciatica: case report, technical note and overview of the literature.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ankie SeigerDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Pravesh S GadjradjDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Biswadjiet S HarhangiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Job Lc van SusanteDepartment of Orthopedics, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Wilco C PeulDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Maurits W van TulderDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Michiel R de BoerDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Sidney M RubinsteinDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLErasmus MC · NLRijnstate Hospital · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLumbosacral radicular syndrome is often caused by a disc herniation. The standard surgical technique to remove a disc herniation is open microdiscectomy. An alternative technique is percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED), which is less invasive. In the Netherlands, PTED is not currently considered as standard care, and therefore not reimbursed within public health insurance. A pragmatic, multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial has been designed to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PTED versus open microdiscectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: In total, 682 patients between 18 and 70 years of age with >10 weeks of radiating pain or with >6 weeks of excessive radiating pain are to be recruited from participating centres. Patients must have an indication for surgery based on an MRI demonstrating compression of the nerve root from a lumbar disc herniation. Patients are to be randomised to PTED or open microdiscectomy. The primary outcome is self-reported leg pain measured by the 0-100 mm Visual Analogue Scale. Secondary outcomes include self-reported health and functional status, back pain, self-perceived recovery and a physical examination. Outcomes will be measured the day following surgery, at 2, 4 and 6 weeks, and at 3, 6, 9, 12 and 24 months. Physical examination will be performed at 6 weeks, and 3 and 12 months. An economic evaluation will be performed from a societal perspective and cost questionnaires will be used (eg, EQ-5D-5L). The data will be analysed longitudinally; the non-inferiority margin for the primary outcome is 5. Bootstrapping techniques will be used for the economic evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received approval of the Medical Ethical Committee of the VU Medical Centre Amsterdam: NL50951.029.14. The results will be published in an international peer-reviewed scientific journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02602093; Pre-results, recruiting stage.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisDisability EvaluationDiskectomy, PercutaneousEndoscopyFemaleHumansIntervertebral Disc DisplacementLogistic ModelsLumbar VertebraeMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandshealth economicsneurosurgery

Identifiers

PMID29273659
PMCPMC5778332
OpenAlexW2776145396

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.