ArticleActa neurochirurgica2023
Long-term outcome after surgery for middle cluneal nerve entrapment neuropathy.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cluneal nerve entrapment decompression: a systematic review of 236 surgical cases.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Pooled it
- Treatment outcomes for cluneal neuropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Brain & spine · 2026Review
- Middle cluneal nerve entrapment sites in the surgical field.Acta neurochirurgica · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEntrapment of the middle cluneal nerve (MCN-E) can elicit low back pain (LBP). Patients whose LBP responds only transiently to the analgesic effects of MCN blockage may be candidates for surgery. This study addresses its long-term efficacy.
methodsWe initially subjected 34 MCN-E patients (48 sides) to surgical release. Of these, 4 were excluded from this study because their follow-up was shorter than 24 months. The mean age of the 30 included patients was 71.5 years; the mean postoperative follow-up period was 40.4 months. Clinical outcomes were assessed on the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for LBP and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) before surgery and at the latest follow-up visit.
resultsThe 30 patients (44 sides) reported severe LBP, leg symptoms were elicited by 32 sides. A mean of 1.4 MCN branches were surgically released, 32 sides were addressed by neurolysis, 7 by neurectomy, and 5 underwent both procedures due to the presence of 2 nerve branches. There were no complications. In the course of a mean follow-up of 26.3 months, MCN-E elicited recurrent symptoms on 6 sides; all had undergone neurolysis or neurectomy and a second operation improved the symptoms. All patients showed significant improvement at the last follow-up visit. Postoperatively both their NRS for LBP and their RDQ scores were improved (pre- vs. postoperative scores, p < 0.05).
conclusionsWhile surgical release of MCN-E is expected to yield long-term symptom relief, on 6 of 32 sides (18.8%) treated by neurolysis the patients reported pain recurrence. Whether neurectomy effectively prevents the recurrence of MCN-E in the long term requires further study.
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.