Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37325689›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

Lumbar Discectomy With Bone-Anchored Annular Closure Device in Patients With Large Annular Defects: One-Year Results.

Pierce Nunley, K Brandon Strenge, Kade Huntsman, Hyun Bae, Christian DiPaola, R T Allen, Andrew Shaw, Rick C Sasso, Ali Araghi, Blake Staub and 3 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

13 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Pierce NunleyOrthopaedics, Spine Institute of Louisiana, Shreveport, USA.
K Brandon StrengeSpine Surgery, The Orthopaedic Institute of Western Kentucky, Paducah, USA.
Kade HuntsmanSpinal Surgery, Salt Lake Orthopaedic Clinic, Salt Lake City, USA.
Hyun BaeOrthopaedic Surgery, Cedars-Sinai, Santa Monica, USA.
Christian DiPaolaOrthopaedics, UMass Memorial Health, Worcester, USA.
R T AllenOrthopaedics, UC (University of California) San Diego Health System, San Diego, USA.
Andrew ShawNeurological Surgery, Lyerly Neurosurgery, Jacksonville, USA.
Rick C SassoOrthopaedic Surgery, Indiana Spine Center, Carmel, USA.
Ali AraghiSpine Surgery, The CORE Institute, Sun City West, USA.
Blake StaubOrthopaedics, Texas Back Institute, Plano, USA.
Selby ChenNeurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, USA.
Laura C ShumEvidence, Telos Partners, LLC, Milford, USA.
Michael MusacchioOrthopaedics, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, USA.
Baptist Medical Center Jacksonville · USIndiana Spine Group · USJacksonville College · USNorthShore University HealthSystem · USOrthopaedic Institute of Western Kentucky · USSalt Lake Regional Medical Center · USSpine Institute of Louisiana · USTexas Back Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

annular closure deviceannular defectannular repairbone-anchored annular closure devicelumbar discectomyquality of lifespinal surgery

Identifiers

PMID37325689
PMCPMC10263173
OpenAlexW4379979907

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.