ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2020
Regional variations in acceptance, and utilization of minimally invasive spinal surgery techniques among spine surgeons: results of a global survey.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- Learning curve insights in Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic (UBE) spinal procedures: proficiency cutoffs and the impact on efficiency and complications.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Pooled it
- The Future of Endoscopic Spine Surgery in the United States: Lifeline or Liability?International journal of spine surgery · 2026Article
- Tubular spinal micro decompression surgery with integrated 2D camera visualization: initial experience and feasibility in Tanzania.Acta neurochirurgica · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Spine Surgery: A Scoping Review of the Literature.Global spine journal · 2026Review
- Evolution of Titanium Interbody Cages and Current Uses of 3D Printed Titanium in Spine Fusion Surgery.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2025Review
- TEMSET-24K: Densely Annotated Dataset for Indexing Multipart Endoscopic Videos using Surgical Timeline Segmentation.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Research advances in unilateral endoscopic spinal surgery for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Review
- Answer to the letter to the editor of C. Liu, et al. concerning "learning curve insights in unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) spinal procedures: proficiency cutoffs and the impact on efficiency and complications" by Jing Peng, et al. (Eur spine J [2025]: doi:10.10071s00586-024-08632-9).European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Reporting the first minimally invasive spine surgery series in Nigeria: a descriptive single-center retrospective cohort study.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Beyond the Limits to Become a Leading Force in Global Spine Surgery: Present and Future of Spine Surgery in Asia-Pacific.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Lumbar Laminectomy and Diskectomy: Postoperative Outcomes and Surgical Learning Curve, a Single US Surgeon's Experience.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2024Article
- Advances and Challenges in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Prospective Study of the Assessment of Anxiety Symptoms after Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2024Article
- Surgeon Perceptions of Performing Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in an Ambulatory Surgical Center vs Hospital Setting in the Elderly Population: Results of a Surgeon Survey.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Time to achievement of minimum clinically important difference after lumbar decompression.Acta neurochirurgica · 2023Article
- Durotomy- and Irrigation-Related Serious Adverse Events During Spinal Endoscopy: Illustrative Case Series and International Surgeon Survey.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Minimally Invasive Tubular Lumbar Discectomy Versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy: An Observational Study From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.Global spine journal · 2023Article
- Personalized Interventional Surgery of the Lumbar Spine: A Perspective on Minimally Invasive and Neuroendoscopic Decompression for Spinal Stenosis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRegional differences in acceptance and utilization of MISST by spine surgeons may have an impact on clinical decision-making and the surgical treatment of common degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine. The purpose of this study was to analyze the acceptance and utilization of various minimally invasive spinal surgery techniques (MISST) by spinal surgeons the world over.
methodsThe authors solicited responses to an online survey sent to spine surgeons by email, and chat groups in social media networks including Facebook, WeChat, WhatsApp, and Linkedin. Surgeons were asked the following questions: (I) Do you think minimally invasive spinal surgery is considered mainstream in your area and practice setting? (II) Do you perform minimally invasive spinal surgery? (III) What type of MIS spinal surgery do you perform? (IV) If you are performing endoscopic spinal decompression surgeries, which approach do you prefer? The responses were cross-tabulated by surgeons' demographic data, and their practice area using the following five global regions: Africa & Middle East, Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. Pearson Chi-Square measures, Kappa statistics, and linear regression analysis of agreement or disagreement were performed by analyzing the distribution of variances using statistical package SPSS Version 25.0.
resultsA total of 586 surgeons accessed the survey. Analyzing the responses of 292 submitted surveys regional differences in opinion amongst spine surgeons showed that the highest percentage of surgeons in Asia (72.8%) and South America (70.2%) thought that MISST was accepted into mainstream spinal surgery in their practice area (P=0.04) versus North America (62.8%), Europe (52.8%), and Africa & Middle East region (50%). The percentage of spine surgeons employing MISST was much higher per region than the rate of surgeons who thought it was mainstream: Asia (96.7%), Europe (88.9%), South America (88.9%), and Africa & Middle East (87.5%). Surgeons in North America reported the lowest rate of MISST implementation globally (P<0.000). Spinal endoscopy (59.9%) is currently the most commonly employed MISST globally followed by mini-open approaches (55.1%), and tubular retractor systems (41.8%). The most preferred endoscopic approach to the spine is the transforaminal technique (56.2%) followed by interlaminar (41.8%), full endoscopic (35.3%), and over the top MISST (13.7%).
conclusionsThe rate of implementation of MISST into day-to-day clinical practice reported by spine surgeons was universally higher than the perceived acceptance rates of MISST into the mainstream by their peers in their practice area. The survey suggests that endoscopic spinal surgery is now the most commonly performed MISST.
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.