ArticleJournal of visualized experiments : JoVE2018
A Mobile Outside-in Technique of Transforaminal Lumbar Endoscopy for Lumbar Disc Herniations.
Article in Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Full-Endoscopic Spine Surgery : Its Roles and Limitations.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2025Article
- Postoperative Radiologic Changes in Early Recurrent Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis After Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Foraminotomy for Lower Lumbar Segments.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- PL-TOSP, the Novel Entry Point in Transforaminal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Radiological Analysis with Prospective Surgical Evaluation and Review of Literature of Various Skin Entry Points.Asian journal of neurosurgery · 2024Article
- A Novel Classification of Migrated Lumbar Disk Herniation Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Algorithm Recommendations for Full-Endoscopic Discectomy.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Article
- Risk Factors of Restenosis After Full Endoscopic Foraminotomy for Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis: Case-Control Study.Neurospine · 2023Article
- Narrative Review of Pathophysiology and Endoscopic Management of Basivertebral and Sinuvertebral Neuropathy for Chronic Back Pain.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- A Comparison Between Retaining and Resecting the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament in Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy for Disc Herniation: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Article
- Differential Agnostic Effect Size Analysis of Lumbar Stenosis Surgeries.International journal of spine surgery · 2022Article
- Remodeling Pattern of Spinal Canal after Full Endoscopic Uniportal Lumbar Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression: One Year Repetitive MRI and Clinical Follow-Up Evaluation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Differential Clinical Benefit Examination of Full Lumbar Endoscopy vs Interspinous Process Spacers in the Treatment of Spinal Stenosis: An Effect Size Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes.International journal of spine surgery · 2022Article
- Difficulties, Challenges, and the Learning Curve of Avoiding Complications in Lumbar Endoscopic Spine Surgery.International journal of spine surgery · 2021Article
- A Narrative Review of Uniportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Comparison of Uniportal Facet-Preserving Trans-Kambin Endoscopic Fusion and Uniportal Facet-Sacrificing Posterolateral Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.International journal of spine surgery · 2021Article
- Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy for different types of lumbar disc herniation: A retrospective study.The Journal of international medical research · 2021Article
- Evaluation of Two Methods (Inside-Out/Outside-In) Inferior Articular Process Resection for Uniportal Full Endoscopic Posterolateral Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Note.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Intraoperative image guidance for endoscopic spine surgery.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Review
- What Is the Ideal Entry Point for Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy?Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2020Article
- Development of Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Healthy Life: To Provide Spine Care for Better, for Worse, for Richer, for Poorer, in Sickness and in Health.Neurospine · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar discectomy (PETLD) has now become a standard of care for the management of lumbar disc disease. There are two techniques for the introduction of a working cannula with respect to disc-outside-in and inside-out. The aim of this prospective study is to describe the technical aspects of a novel mobile outside-in method in dealing with different types of disc prolapse. A total of 184 consecutive patients with unilateral lower limb radiculopathy due to lumbar disc prolapse were operated on with the mobile outside-in technique of PETLD. Their clinical outcomes were evaluated based on the type of disc prolapse they had, a visual analog scale (VAS) leg pain score, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the Macnab criteria. The completeness of the decompression was documented with a postoperative magnetic resonance imaging. The mean age of the patients was 50 ± 16 years and the male/female ratio was 2:1. The mean follow-up was 19 ± 6 months. A total of 190 lumbar levels were operated on (L1-L2: n = 4, L2-L3: n = 17, L3-L4: n = 27, L4-5: n = 123, and L5-S1: n = 19). Divided into types, the patient distribution was central: n = 14, paracentral: n = 74, foraminal: n = 28, far lateral: n = 13, superior-migrated: n = 8, inferior migrated: n = 38, and high canal compromise: n = 9. The mean operative time was 35 ± 12 (25 - 56) min and the mean hospital stay was 1.2 ± 0.5 (1-3) days. The VAS score for leg pain improved from 7.5 ± 1 to 1.7 ± 0.9. The ODI improved from 70 ± 8.3 to 23 ± 5. According to the Macnab criteria, 75 patients (40.8%) had excellent results, 104 patients (56.5%) had good results, and 5 patients (2.7%) had fair results. Recurrence (including early and late) was seen in 15 out of the 190 levels that were operated on (7.89%). This article presents a novel outside-in approach that relies on a precise landing within the foramen in a mobile manner and does not solely depend upon the enlargement of the foramen. It is more versatile in application and useful in the management of all types of disc prolapse, even in severe canal compromise and high migration.
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.