Trial reportJAMA network open2022
Comparison of 3 Different Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 44 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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.
Comparison of Different Surgical Treatments for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Clinical and Radiological Results Using "Spinous Process Osteotomy", "Bilateral Laminotomy" and "Unilateral Laminotomy With Crossover"
Retrospective Comparison of Tubular Decompression With or Without Multisegmental Rhizotomy Versus Transfacetal TLIF for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A 25-Year Observational Cohort Analysis
Who cites it
44 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Minimally invasive tubular decompression versus traditional open surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Unilateral Endoscopic and Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Surgical interventions for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review with network meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative effects of different posterior decompression techniques for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Pooled it
- Decompression alone versus decompression with fusion in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.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 · 2023Pooled it
- ISSLS Prize in Clinical Science 2025: A randomized trial on three different minimally invasive decompression techniques for lumbar spinal stenosis. Five years follow-up from the NORDSTEN-SST.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 · 2025Trial
- Delta large-channel endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective randomized controlled trial.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Trial
- Dural Sac Cross-sectional area change from preoperatively and up to 2 years after decompressive surgery for central lumbar spinal stenosis: investigation of operated levels, data from the NORDSTEN study.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 · 2024Trial
- The association between lumbar lordosis preoperatively and changes in PROMs for lumbar spinal stenosis patients 2 years after spinal surgery: radiological and clinical results from the NORDSTEN-spinal stenosis trial.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 · 2024Trial
- Is the presence of foraminal stenosis associated with outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis patients treated with posterior microsurgical decompression.Acta neurochirurgica · 2023Trial
- The association between preoperative MRI findings and clinical improvement in patients included in the NORDSTEN spinal stenosis trial.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 · 2022Trial
- Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Comprehensive Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2026Review
- Lumbar approaches and procedures for spinal stenosis (Neurocore-LAPS): an international survey of decompression strategies across disease extent.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 · 2026Article
- A Prospective Comparative Study of Instrumented versus Noninstrumented Decompression in Lumbar Canal Stenosis.Annals of African medicine · 2026Article
- Targeting the Symptom-Driving Level in Multilevel Lumbar Stenosis Using Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy: A Strategy Reappraisal.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Interlaminar versus sublaminar lumbar decompression: a retrospective study on patient satisfaction as measured by PROMIS outcomes.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Comparative efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopy and micro-endoscopic discectomy in the treatment of elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Agreement of CT versus MRI in reinvestigation of patients operated for lumbar spinal stenosis. a comparison of surgically and non-surgically treated levels.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 · 2026Article
- The Effect of Unilateral Laminotomy Decompression in the Prevention of Adjacent Spinal Canal Stenosis During Lumbar Fusion.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Comparing Spinopelvic Angles and Magnification on Supine MRI With Standing Radiographs in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Clinical spine surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Operations for lumbar spinal stenosis is the most often performed surgical procedure in the adult lumbar spine. This study reports the clinical outcome of the 3 most commonly used minimally invasive posterior decompression techniques. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of 3 minimally invasive posterior decompression techniques for lumbar spinal stenosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial used a parallel group design and included patients with symptomatic and radiologically verified lumbar spinal stenosis without degenerative spondylolisthesis. Patients were enrolled between February 2014 and October 2018 at the orthopedic and neurosurgical departments of 16 Norwegian public hospitals. Statistical analysis was performed in the period from May to June 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomized to undergo 1 of the 3 minimally invasive posterior decompression techniques: unilateral laminotomy with crossover, bilateral laminotomy, and spinous process osteotomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was change in disability measured with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; range 0-100), presented as mean change from baseline to 2-year follow-up and proportions of patients classified as success (>30% reduction in ODI). Secondary outcomes were mean change in quality of life, disease-specific symptom severity measured with Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), back pain and leg pain on a 10-point numeric rating score (NRS), patient perceived benefit of the surgical procedure, duration of the surgical procedure, blood loss, perioperative complications, number of reoperations, and length of hospital stay. Results: In total, 437 patients were included with a median (IQR) age of 68 (62-73) years and 230 men (53%). Of the included patients, 146 were randomized to unilateral laminotomy with crossover, 142 to bilateral laminotomy, and 149 to spinous process osteotomy. The unilateral laminotomy with crossover group had a mean change of -17.9 ODI points (95% CI, -20.8 to -14.9), the bilateral laminotomy group had a mean change of -19.7 ODI points (95% CI, -22.7 to -16.8), and the spinous process osteotomy group had a mean change of -19.9 ODI points (95% CI, -22.8 to -17.0). There were no significant differences in primary or secondary outcomes among the 3 surgical procedures, except a longer duration of the surgical procedure in the bilateral laminotomy group. Conclusions and Relevance: No differences in clinical outcomes or complication rates were found among the 3 minimally invasive posterior decompression techniques used to treat patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02007083.
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.