Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37266693›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2023

Natural pressure drainage versus negative pressure drainage following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for the treatment of lumbar degeneration disease: a prospective cohort study.

Fengxian Jiang, Han Wu, Mengyang Pu, Yixin Shen, Peng Zhang, Wentao Zhong

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fengxian Jiang *Department of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China.
Han Wu *Department of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China.
Mengyang PuDepartment of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China.
Yixin ShenDepartment of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China.
Peng ZhangDepartment of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China. 57994891@qq.com.
Wentao ZhongDepartment of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China. 438775559@qq.com.
Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University · CNSoochow University · CN

Funding

State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection GZK1202128Suzhou health talent plan GSWS2021019Suzhou scientific research foundation of integrated traditional Chinese and Western Medicine SKJYD2021220
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo comprehensively compare the perioperative data and clinical outcomes of natural pressure drainage (NAPD) and negative pressure drainage (NEPD) following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for the treatment of lumbar degeneration disease.

methodsBetween January 2021 and December 2021, 203 patients in our hospital who underwent single- or two-segment TLIF were assigned to the NAPD group (112 patients) or the NEPD group (91 patients) based on different postoperative drainage methods. Between the two groups, comparisons were made regarding the demographics, intraoperative and postoperative data, patient-reported outcomes, and complications.

resultsThe NAPD group experienced less overall drainage and fewer postoperative drainage days (157.89 vs. 318.49 ml/249.54 vs. 589.43 ml, 2.00 vs. 2.67 days/2.04 vs. 2.74 days, P < 0.001) than the NEPD group. The NAPD group has a higher rate of overall hidden blood loss (HBL) than the NEPD group (63.98% vs. 51.90%/65.80% vs. 48.11%, P < 0.001); HBL, however, did not significantly differ between the two groups (P > 0.05). In two-segment surgery, the postoperative hemoglobin (HGB) levels were higher in the NAPD group (99.67 vs. 92.69 g/L, P < 0.05), but there was no difference in single-segment surgery (P > 0.05). Regardless of whether single- or two-segment surgery was performed, the NAPD group had a lower HGB level loss (18.81% vs. 21.63%/26.35% vs. 32.08%, P < 0.05). There was no discernible difference between the two groups in the visual analog scale (VAS) scores for symptomatic epidural hematoma, postoperative body temperature, low back and leg pain, or incision infection (P > 0.05).

conclusionNAPD did not increase postoperative complications but did significantly reduce postoperative drainage volume and the risk of anemia. We show that, when compared to NEPD, NAPD may be a better option for patients following TLIF.

Indexed as

Low Back PainSpinal FusionDrainageHumansLumbar VertebraeMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeNatural pressure drainageNegative pressure drainagePatient-reported outcomesPostoperative drainageTLIF

Identifiers

PMID37266693
OpenAlexW4379093881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.