ArticleClinical interventions in aging2019
Comparison of Effects of PELD and Fenestration in the Treatment of Geriatric Lumbar Lateral Recess Stenosis.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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 · 2020Trial
- Novel anatomical landmark guided puncture method in L4/L5 spine posterior interlaminar endoscopic surgery: a technical note and case series.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Impact of computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging registration on rehabilitation after percutaneous endoscopic decompression for lumbar stenosis: Retrospective study.World journal of orthopedics · 2024Article
- Article
- Clinical outcome of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression in treatment of elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a matched retrospective study.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
- [Comparison of effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion and endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis combined with intervertebral disc herniation].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2023Article
- [Research progress of different minimally invasive spinal decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2023Review
- Short-Term Patient Outcomes Using the Interlaminar Endoscopic Surgical System Ilessys® Delta System versus Bilateral Laminotomy: A Single-Center Study of 80 Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
- Complications and Management of Endoscopic Spinal Surgery.Neurospine · 2023Article
- Efficacy of Repeat Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression for Reoperation of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Study.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Research Trends of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation Over the Past Decade: A Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2023Review
- A Comparative Study of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression and Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression for Geriatric Patients with Lumbar Lateral Recess Stenosis.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Application of a new body surface-assisting puncture device in percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- Comparison of the safety and efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion and uniportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion: a 1-year follow-up.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Article
- Whether Out-of-Bed Activity Restriction in the Early Postoperative Period of PELD Is Beneficial to Therapeutic Efficacy or Reduce Recurrence.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Complications and risk factors of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
- Linical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients: a retrospective study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2020Article
- Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression for Geriatric Patients with Central Spinal Stenosis and Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Novel Surgical Technique and Clinical Outcomes.Clinical interventions in aging · 2020Article
- Clinical Comparison of Full-Endoscopic and Microscopic Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression in the Treatment of Elderly Lumbar Spinal stenosis: A Retrospective Study with 12-Month Follow-Up.Journal of pain research · 2020Article
- [Preoperative precise diagnosis and surgical treatment outcomes in patients with atypical low back and leg pain].Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAlthough degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is increasingly being diagnosed in older people, there is much uncertainty about the appropriate operative treatment options. The objective of this study was to compare the outcome of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD) versus fenestration for lumbar lateral recess stenosis (LRS) in geriatric patients over 75 years old. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective controlled study was performed on 46 consecutive over aged patients with lateral recess stenosis who underwent either PELD or fenestration. Clinical data were recorded before, 1 week, 3 months and 1.5 years after surgery using visual analog scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score (JOA), The Short-Form-36 (SF-36), and the modified Macnab evaluation criteria.
resultsThe patients' mean age was 82.7 years (aged 75-93 years) in PELD group and 79.1 years (aged 75-88 years) in fenestration group. No statistical difference was found between PELD group and fenestration group with regards to VAS-back pain, VAS-leg pain, JOA and at 3 months and 1.5-year follow-up. However, the PELD group had a lower mean VAS for back pain at 1 week postoperatively (P<0.05). The quality of life in PELD group achieved the same remarkable improvement as fenestration group (P>0.05). Operative time (min) was similar between two groups (p>0.05), while the PELD techniques brought advantages in blood loss (mL) (48.3 vs 128.2, p<0.05), early ambulation (h) (5.5 vs 25.2, p<0.05), and anesthesia-related complications.
conclusionBoth PELD and fenestration showed favorable clinical outcomes for the treatment of lumbar lateral recess stenosis. In addition, PELD had advantages such as reduced traumatization and less anesthesia-related complications. In terms of quality of life and complications after operation, PELD under local anesthesia could be an efficient supplement to conventional decompression surgery in geriatric patients with lumbar lateral recess stenosis.
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.