ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2020
Long-Term Clinical Outcomes and Pain Assessment after Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Comprehensive Review of Spinal Arthroplasty.Neurospine · 2026Review
- A novel approach to ultrasound-guided L3-4 thoracolumbar fascia injection for chronic pain after spine surgery: a prospective pilot study.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a predictive model and tool for functional recovery in patients after postero-lateral interbody fusion.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Which Kind of Prognosis is Better in the Treatment of Cervical and Lumbar Disc Herniation with Coblation Nucleoplasty?Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- Article
- Applications of the Crenel Lateral Interbody Fusion Procedure in Treatment for Adjacent Segments Degeneration of the Lumbar Spine.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Article
- The effect of posterior lumbar dynamic fixation and intervertebral fusion on paraspinal muscles.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the long term effects of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), applied after recurrent lumbar disc herniation (rLDH), on pain relief and clinical outcome improvement.
methodsThe current study is a retrospective study. We observed 22 cases from 85 patients that had undergone PLIF during February 2003 to October 2012 and all patients were followed for at least 5 years. The average age of those patients were 53 years, among them there were eight men and 14 women. Plain radiography and dynamic plain films were obtained, pre-operation, for every patient. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) was conducted to confirm the diagnosis of rLDH before the operation. All surgeries were performed from posterior approach by the same surgeon using PLIF. Quality of life (QOL) and clinical outcomes were assessed by Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scoring system, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) before revision surgery and at 1 week, 3 months, 12 months, and 24 months postoperative. These were also examined every time they came back to the hospital for a review.
resultsAll patients were discharged and no serious comorbidities occurred. Three cases with wound infections and one case with dural laceration were cured and discharged. The end point of follow-up was August 2018 and the mean follow-up after revision surgery was 85 months. There were significant differences in NRS. It decreased from 7.32 ± 1.17 to 2.77 ± 1.31 (P < 0.05). The mean postoperative NRS score was 2.27 ± 1.48 (P < 0.05), 1.90 ± 1.51 (P < 0.05), and 2.36 ± 1.36 (P < 0.05) at 3, 12, and 24 months after surgery. There were no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) in ODI scores. The average JOA score improved from 5.00 ± 1.08 to 8.18 ± 1.59 (P < 0.05) 1 week after revision surgery. RR was between 50% and 70%. Overall satisfaction rates were beyond 80%. Only one patient required subsequent lumber surgery during the follow-up period.
conclusionIf surgical indications are mastered, undergoing PLIF after rLDH may induce efficient pain relief and major improvements in clinical outcome scores, as well as quality of life scores.
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.