ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2022
Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy is a safer approach for lumbar disc herniation.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Efficacy of Percutaneous Endoscopic Discectomy for the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation in Patients Over 70 Years Old.Clinical spine surgery · 2026Article
- Centrifuge trephine-guided foraminoplasty in endoscopic lumbar discectomy: a laboratory and clinical evaluation.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Postoperative MRI Findings Following PELD and Their Correlations with Clinical Prognosis are Investigated by Injecting Contrast into Annulus Fibrosus Intraoperatively.Journal of pain research · 2024Article
- Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Article
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 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesHerein, we explored the safety and efficacy of the percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and fenestration discectomy (FD) in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH).
methodsThe complete clinical data of 87 LDH patients, who were admitted to the Peking University People's Hospital between May 2018 and March 2020, were retrospectively analyzed. These patients were initially separated into a control (n=39, treated with FD) and research group (n=48, treated with PTED), based on the prescribed treatments. We compared the basic operational conditions between the two groups, and assessed the surgical outcomes using the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scores (JOA), and modified MacNab scale. Lastly, we analyzed the complication incidence and life quality of patients at 1-year follow up after surgery.
resultsAll participants in both groups completed the operation. The amount of intraoperative blood loss, surgical duration, length of surgical incision, postoperative ambulation start time, and length of hospital stay were all significantly shorter in the research group as compared to the control group (P<0.05). Moreover, the VAS and ODI scores of the patients in the research group were lower than the control group at 3-months after surgery, while the JOA score was markedly higher (all P<0.05). In addition, the success rate was higher, and the complication rate lower, in the research group, compared to the control group (all P<0.05). Lastly, no statistical differences were observed in the quality of life of patients before the operation, or at 1-year follow up (P>0.05).
conclusionsBased on our analyses, PTED and FD were both effective in treating LDH. However, PTED exhibited a higher success rate, faster recovery time, and was safer than FD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36247293PMC9556453W4306669449What 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.