SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2023
Comparison of outcomes between tubular microdiscectomy and conventional microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 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.
- Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Biochemical Markers Following Tubular Microscopic Discectomy Versus Full Endoscopic Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- "ULTRA" Lateral Decompression Technique for Lumbar Discectomy: An Evaluation of 30-Day Outcomes From an 8-Year Single Surgeon Experience.International journal of spine surgery · 2026Article
- Mid-term follow-up of far lateral microdiscectomy-surgical technique, outcomes and reoperation rates.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Precise localization value of lumbar lamina and ligamentum flavum boundaries in minimally invasive tubular resection of intraspinal schwannomas.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe clinical outcomes of using a tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation were evaluated by comparison with conventional microdiscectomy.
methodsAll of the comparative studies published in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases as of 1 May 2023 were included. All outcomes were analysed using Review Manager 5.4.
resultsThis meta-analysis included four randomized controlled studies with a total of 523 patients. The results showed that using tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation was more effective than conventional microdiscectomy in improving the Oswestry Disability Index (P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in operating time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, Visual Analogue Scale, reoperation rate, postoperative recurrence rate, dural tear incidence, and complications rate (all P > 0.05) between the tubular microdiscectomy and conventional microdiscectomy groups.
conclusionsBased on our meta-analysis, it was found that the tubular microdiscectomy group had better outcomes than the conventional microdiscectomy group in terms of Oswestry Disability Index. However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of operating time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, Visual Analogue Scale, reoperation rate, postoperative recurrence rate, dural tear incidence, and complications rate. Current research suggests that tubular microdiscectomy can achieve clinical results similar to those of conventional microdiscectomy. PROSPERO registration number is: CRD42023407995.
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.