ArticleCureus2023
Lumbar Discectomy With Bone-Anchored Annular Closure Device in Patients With Large Annular Defects: One-Year Results.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mechanical and Biological Treatments for Annulus Fibrosus Repair and Closure: A Review of Clinical Studies.Neurospine · 2026Review
- A novel allograft combined with modified purse-string suture fixation for annulus fibrosus repair: biomechanical evaluation in a porcine lumbar disc model.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- A new hernia blocking system prevents lumbar disc herniation recurrence and disc degeneration: 2 years results of a multicentric clinical investigation.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Beyond Pain Relief: Preventing Recurrence and Preserving Function After Lumbar Discectomy.International journal of spine surgery · 2025Article
- ISASS Recommendations and Coverage Criteria for Bone-Anchored Annular Defect Closure Following Lumbar Discectomy: Coverage Indications, Limitations, and/or Medical Necessity-An ISASS 2025 Policy Update on the Use of Bone-Anchored Annular Closure to Prevent Reherniation in High-Risk Lumbar Discectomy Patients.International journal of spine surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Utilization of Bone-Anchored Annular Defect Closure to Prevent Reherniation Following Lumbar Discectomy: Overcoming Barriers to Clinical Adoption and Market Access.International journal of spine surgery · 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
13 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReherniation rates following lumbar discectomy are low for most patients; however, patients with a large defect in the annulus fibrosis have a significantly higher risk of recurrence. Previous results from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated that the implantation of a bone-anchored annular closure device (ACD) during discectomy surgery lowered the risk of symptomatic reherniation and reoperation over one year with fewer serious adverse events (SAEs) compared to discectomy alone.
objectiveThe objective of this prospective, post-market, historically controlled study was to evaluate the use of an ACD during discectomy, and to confirm the results of the RCT that was used to establish regulatory approval in the United States.
methodsIn this post-market study, all patients (N = 55) received discectomy surgery with a bone-anchored ACD. The comparison population was patients enrolled in the RCT study who had discectomy with an ACD (N = 262) or discectomy alone (N = 272). All other eligibility criteria, surgical technique, device characteristics, and follow-up methodology were comparable between studies. Endpoints included rate of symptomatic reherniation or reoperation, SAEs, and patient-reported measures of disability, pain, and quality of life.
resultsFifty-five patients received ACD implants at 12 sites between May 2020 and February 2021. In the previous RCT, 272 control patients had discectomy surgery alone (RCT-Control), and 262 patients had discectomy surgery with an ACD implant (RCT-ACD). Baseline characteristics across groups were typical of the overall population undergoing lumbar discectomy. The proportion of patients who experienced reherniation and/or reoperation was significantly lower in the ACD group compared to RCT-ACD and RCT-Control groups (p < 0.05). In the ACD study, the one-year rate of symptomatic reherniation was 3.7%, compared to 8.5% in the RCT-ACD group and 17.0% in the RCT-Control group. In the ACD group, the risk of reoperation was 5.5%, compared to 6.5% in the RCT-ACD group and 12.5% in the RCT-Control group. There were no device-related SAEs or device integrity failures in the ACD, and there were clinically meaningful improvements in patient-reported measures of disability, pain, and quality of life.
conclusionIn this post-market study of bone-anchored ACD in patients with large annular defects, rates of symptomatic reherniation, reoperation, and SAEs were all low. Compared to the RCT, the post-market ACD study demonstrated lower rates of reherniation and/or reoperation and measures of back pain one-year post-surgery.
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.