ArticleMedicine2020
A randomized study protocol of microendoscopic versus open discectomy in treatment of lumbar disc herniation.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It carries an expression of concern. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Expression of concern
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLumbar disk herniation (LDH) is one of the main causes of discogenic low back pain. However, the evidence comparing different approaches for discectomy has lacked definitive conclusions, with conflicting results regarding the benefit of minimally invasive versus open techniques for LDH. We are now conducting a randomized controlled trial to figure out whether or not microendoscopic discectomy yields better clinical outcomes and causes less surgical trauma than open surgery.
methodsThis prospective, randomized, single-blind, controlled, superiority clinical trial was approved by the institutional review board in the People's Hospital of Jianyang City. The conduct of this study followed the Declaration of Helsinki principles and the reporting of this study adhered to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines for randomized controlled trials. Subjects were randomized into 2 groups as follows: open surgery and microendoscopic group. The outcomes included pain score, functional outcome, satisfaction rate, radiological outcomes, and complications. The statistical analyses in this study were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 20.0 software. P < .05 was accepted as statistically significant.
resultsThe hypothesis was that the open technique would achieve similar clinical outcomes as compared to the microendoscopic technique in LDH.
trial registrationThis study protocol was registered in Research Registry (researchregistry5708).
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.