ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2022
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This meta-analysis evaluated surgical outcomes following endoscopic or conventional discectomy for recurrent lumbar disc herniation. Methods: Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were search until October 16, 2016 using these terms: recurrent lumbar disc herniation, endoscopic surgery, and discectomy. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective, retrospective, and cohort studies were eligible for inclusion. Pooled difference in mean (PDM) with 95% confidence interval (CIs) or relative risks (RRs) were calculated using fixed-effects methods. Results: One RCT and 15 studies were included with a total of 820 patients. Patients received endoscopic surgery experienced shorter operation time than those received conventional surgery (PDM: -52.01, 95% CI: -76.84 to -27.18, Conclusions: Endoscopic and conventional discectomy reduced patient pain comparably, but endoscopic discectomy had significantly lower operation time and lower risk in complications, which may impact other outcomes such as recovery and healthcare costs. More studies are needed to confirm our findings. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-022-00636-1.
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.