ArticlePloS one2023
Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of conventional and interlaminar full-endoscopic decompressive laminectomy to treat lumbar spinal stenosis (ENDO-F trial): Protocol for a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial.
Article in PloS one, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interlaminar versus sublaminar lumbar decompression: a retrospective study on patient satisfaction as measured by PROMIS outcomes.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Spine Surgery: A Scoping Review of the Literature.Global spine journal · 2026Review
- Article
- Is minimally invasive surgery a game changer in spinal surgery?Asian spine journal · 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
16 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lumbar spinal stenosis is a common spinal degenerative condition. Minimally invasive interlaminar full-endoscopic decompressive laminectomy provides greater patient satisfaction and faster recovery than open decompressive laminectomy. The aim of our randomized controlled trial will be to compare the safety and efficacy of interlaminar full-endoscopic laminectomy and open decompressive laminectomy. Our trial will include 120 participants (60 per group) who will undergo surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. The primary outcome will be the Oswestry Disability Index measured at 12 months postoperatively. Secondary patient-reported outcomes will include back and radicular leg pain measured via a visual analog scale; the Oswestry Disability Index; the Euro-QOL-5 Dimensions score measured at 2 weeks and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively; and patient satisfaction. The functional measures will include time to return to daily activities postoperatively and walking distance/time. The surgical outcomes will include postoperative drainage, operation time, duration of hospital stay, postoperative creatine kinase (an indicator of muscle injury) level, and postoperative surgical scarring. Magnetic resonance and computed tomography images and simple radiographs will be obtained for all patients. The safety outcomes will include surgery-related complications and adverse effects. All evaluations will be performed by a single assessor at each participating hospital who will be blinded to group allocation. The evaluations will be conducted preoperatively and at 2 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. The randomized, multicenter design of the trial, blinding, and justification of the sample size will reduce the risk of bias in our trial. The results of the trial will provide data regarding the use of interlaminar full-endoscopic laminectomy as an alternative to open decompressive laminectomy that results in similar surgical findings with less invasiveness. Trial registration: This trial is registered at cris.nih.go.kr. (KCT0006198; protocol version 1; 27 May 2021).
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.