ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2020
Degree of satisfaction following full-endoscopic cervical foraminotomy.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Safety of Unilateral Interlaminar Endoscopic Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Study of 176 Cases With a 3-6 Year Follow-Up.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
- Rare variant of cervical conjoined nerve root confirmed during full endoscopic cervical foraminotomy: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2025Article
- Comparison of the Outcomes of Microendoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy versus Full-endoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy for the Treatment of Cervical Radiculopathy.Neurologia medico-chirurgica · 2023Article
- Fully endoscopic cervical spine surgery: What does the future hold?Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2021Review
- The Analgesic Effect of Different Concentrations of Epidural Ropivacaine Alone or Combined With Sufentanil in Patients After Cesarean Section.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- A Comparative Study on the Minimal Invasiveness of Full-Endoscopic and Microendoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy Using Intraoperative Motor Evoked Potential Monitoring.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundForaminotomy has been reported to be effective for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy (CR). Foraminotomy has been performed by an open approach or minimally invasive approach using a microscope or endoscope. A review of the literature has revealed that both the open and minimally invasive approach provide good clinical results. Since the introduction of full-endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (FECF) followed by microendoscopic cervical foraminotomy, we adopted FECF in 2016. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree of satisfaction following FECF for CR.
methodsA total of 109 consecutive patients underwent FECF for CR. All operations were performed at Iwai Orthopaedic Medical Hospital. Patient background information and operative data were collected. The numerical rating scale (NRS) score for the arm was assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at the time of discharge from the hospital. The satisfaction score was also recorded at discharge and the 3 months after the operation.
resultsIn total 109 patients, the mean age was 51.3 years; 22.9% were female and 77.1% were male. The cervical level most frequently operated on was C6/7, followed by C5/6. The mean hospital stay was 4.7 days. The mean operation time was 61.7 minutes. The estimated blood loss was 0 to 10 mg in all cases. One patient exhibited temporary postoperative muscle weakness, although he recovered within 1 year. There was one case of dural tear, and no cases of nerve root injury or surgical site infection. There was one case of reoperation by microendoscopic surgery in 3 months due to insufficient improvement. Preoperative NRS scores for the arm was 4.6 and it improved significantly postoperatively to 2.1 for the entire study group. The mean satisfaction score at discharge was 7.5. The mean score at 3 months after the operations was 7.4.
conclusionsDegree of satisfaction following FECF for CR was high 3 months after the operation.
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.