SynthesisBioMed research international2022
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for the Treatment of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BioMed research international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy via a Modified Inferolateral Margin of the L5 Pedicle Projection for L5/S1 Central Disc Herniation: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Real-time video communication during percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy is beneficial to postoperative recovery: a single-center retrospective 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 · 2025Article
- Repeat Surgery after Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Adolescent Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Multicenter Observational Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the incidence and safety of clinical complications associated with percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) for the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) by meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science electronic databases were searched for clinical studies on complications related to the treatment of RLDH with PELD. The search time extended from the databases' inception until May 2021. RevMan5.4 software was used for meta-analysis after two researchers independently scanned the literature, gathered data, and assessed the bias risk of the included studies. Results: A total of 8 clinical studies, including 1 randomized controlled trial and 7 cohort studies including 906 individuals, were included. According to the results of the meta-analysis, the overall complications (OR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.04-0.83, Conclusion: PELD is an effective and safe method for the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation, with a lower incidence of complications and higher safety profile than traditional fenestration nucleus pulposus removal.
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.