ArticleCureus2022
Evaluation of Endoscopic Versus Open Lumbar Discectomy: A Multi-Center Retrospective Review Utilizing the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) Database.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Biochemical Markers Following Tubular Microscopic Discectomy Versus Full Endoscopic Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- "ULTRA" Lateral Decompression Technique for Lumbar Discectomy: An Evaluation of 30-Day Outcomes From an 8-Year Single Surgeon Experience.International journal of spine surgery · 2026Article
- Cost-effective unilateral biportal endoscopic microdiscectomy: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2026Article
- Physicians in Training Learning Endoscopy: Reduction in Radiation Exposure with Optical Navigation Technology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Learning curve in full-endoscopic lumbar surgery for disc herniation in a spine clinic in Mexico: Comparative analysis of IELD and TELD techniques.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Mounting the learning curve in unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression in an Asian population: experience of a single surgeon's first 105 consecutive cases with early functional outcomes.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Preoperative Characteristics and Postoperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Part I Endoscopic Microdiscectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Endoscopic spinal surgery in adjacent segment disease-a viable alternative to transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a case report.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Comparison of endoscopic and non-endoscopic lumbar decompression outcomes using ACS-NSQIP database 2017-2022.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Current Trends and Future Directions in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Review of Emerging Techniques and Evolving Management Paradigms.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Postendoscopic spine surgery bacterial meningitis requiring multiple surgical interventions: A complex case report.Radiology case reports · 2024Article
- Enhancing Transforaminal Full Endoscopic Discectomy: Efficacy of the Hand Down Outside-In (HDOI) Technique.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Nerve root retraction time during lumbar endoscopic discectomy: association with new onset radiculitis, a post-operative neurologic complication.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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEndoscopic techniques in spine surgery continue to gain popularity due to their potential for decreased blood loss and post-operative pain. However, limited studies have evaluated these techniques within the United States. Additionally, given the limited number of practitioners with experience in endoscopy, most current studies are limited by a lack of heterogeneity.
methodsThe American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried to evaluate the effect of endoscopic surgery on adverse events. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for open discectomy were compared with the relevant CPT codes for endoscopic lumbar discectomy. Baseline patient characteristics and adverse outcomes were then compared. Results: A total of 38,497 single-level lumbar discectomies were identified and included. Of these, 175 patients undergoing endoscopic discectomy were compared with 38,322 patients undergoing open discectomy. Endoscopic discectomy demonstrated a shorter operative time of 88.6 minutes than 92.1 minutes in the open group. However, this was not significant (p=0.08). Patients in the endoscopic group demonstrated a shorter total length of stay of 0.81 days vs 1.15 days (p=0.014). Total adverse events were lower in the endoscopic group at 0.6% vs 3.4% in the open group (p=0.03).
conclusionEndoscopic discectomy demonstrated a significantly lower rate of adverse events and shorter total length of stay than open discectomy. Further research is necessary over time to evaluate larger patient populations as this technology is more rapidly incorporated.
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.