ArticleCureus2021
Lumbar Disc Herniation: Comparing Pain Relief After Medical and Surgical Intervention.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy vs. microdiscectomy in lumbar disc herniation.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes of short rod technique in posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery: a minimum of 2-year follow-up.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 · 2024Article
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The most common degenerative abnormality of the lumbar spine is lumbar disc herniation. There are two options of treatment, i.e. medical and surgical. Due to the scarcity of literature, it is a need of the hour to further study and evaluate the benefits and efficacy of early surgical intervention versus conservative management of lumbar disc herniation. Methods This study was conducted in the neurology unit of a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan from April 2019 to March 2021. After obtaining informed consent, 250 patients with a lumbar disc herniation, between the ages of 20 and 50 years, were enrolled in the study. Out of them, 81 participants chose surgical intervention while 169 participants chose medical intervention. Before the intervention, the patient's pain score was noted on the visual analog scale (VAS). The pain was assessed again 14 days after surgical intervention and 90 days after the start of medical intervention. Results There was a significant difference in the pain score in the post-intervention period in both the medical (7.01 ± 1.05 vs. 3.54 ± 0.51; p-value: <0.0001) and surgical intervention groups (6.92 ± 0.95 vs. 2.41 ± 0.42; p-value: <0.0001). Post-intervention, the VAS pain score was significantly lower in the surgical group as compared to the medical group (2.41 ± 0.42 vs. 3.54 ± 0.51; p-value: <0.0001). Conclusion In this study, there was a significant decline in pain in both groups; however, the reduction was more significant in the surgical group. Patients should be given both options for management of lumbar disc herniation and should be explained the pros and cons of each treatment option.
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.