Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30443133›Full record

ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine

Microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniations.

Anil Patil, Ashish Chugh, Sarang Gotecha, Megha Kotecha, Prashant Punia, Aditya Ashok, Gaurav Amle

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anil PatilDepartment of Neurosurgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Ashish ChughDepartment of Neurosurgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Sarang GotechaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Megha KotechaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Prashant PuniaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Aditya AshokDepartment of Neurosurgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Gaurav AmleDepartment of Neurosurgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLumbar disc herniation is one of the main causes of discogenic low back pain and reported to affect 60%-80% of people during their lifetime. The two main surgical modalities for intervertebral disc surgery are standard open discectomy and minimally invasive discectomy which include percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and microendoscopic discectomy (MED). We report our experience with the same technique of MED to evaluate the efficacy of MED for lumbar disc pathology. AIMS AND

objectivesThe aims and objectives were to study the efficacy, advantages, and associated limitations and complications of MED in lumbar disc herniations. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study was carried out on 300 patients who had single-level herniated disc. The procedure was done by Microscopic Endoscopic Tubular Retraction System. Preoperative assessment of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and modified Suezawa and Schreiber (MSS) clinical scoring system was documented 1 day prior to surgery. Postoperative results were determined to be excellent, good, fair, or poor according to MacNab criteria and also evaluated by MSS clinical scoring system on postoperative day 7 and after 6 months.

resultsA total of 187 patients were males and 113 patients were females and a majority of patients were in the age group of 31-40 years. A total of 192 patients had disc herniations at L4-L5 level. The mean operative time was 82 min and the mean hospital stay was 5.3 days. Eighteen cases (6%) developed postoperative complications including discitis, dysesthesia, recurrent prolapsed intervertebral disc, residual disc, dural tear, and nerve root injury. Mean preoperative VAS score was 8.7 and the mean postoperative VAS scores at postoperative day 7 and at 6 months were 2.25 and 1.12, respectively. The mean preoperative MSS score was 3.27 and the MSS scores at postoperative day 7 and at 6 months were 7.42 and 8.2, respectively. The overall successful outcome of the endoscopic discectomy after 6-month follow-up on the basis of VAS improvement percentage was 87.6%, MSS scoring percentage was 91.6%, and MacNab scoring percentage was 92.67%.

conclusionMED is a safe and effective technique. It offers decreased blood loss, shorter operative time, shorter in-hospital stay, decreased need for pain medication, decreased rate of infection, and a shorter return to work time. Limitations of this technique include a learning curve which is related to surgery time, complications, conversion to open procedures, and recurrent disc herniation.

Indexed as

Lumbar disc herniationmicroendoscopic discectomyminimally invasive spine surgery

Identifiers

PMID30443133
PMCPMC6187901
OpenAlexW2895885258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.