Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37798790›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2023

Minimally invasive tubular microdiscectomy for recurrent lumbar disc herniation: step-by-step technical description with safe scar dissection.

Khaled Fares AlAli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Khaled Fares AlAliDepartment of Neurosurgery, Zayed Military Hospital, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. drkhaled@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8694-2979

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRecurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) is one of the most common reasons for re-operation after primary lumbar disc herniation with an incidence ranging from 5 to 23%. Numerous RLDH studies have been conducted; however, no available studies have provided a specific description of the use of the tubular retractor discectomy technique for RLDH emphasizing safe scar dissection. The objective of this study is to describe a detailed step-by-step technique for RLDH. MATERIAL AND

methodsA surgical technique reporting on our experience from the year 2013-2021 in 9 patients with RLDH at the same level and same side was included in the study. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog score (VAS) for leg pain before and three months after surgery.

resultsA significant improvement was observed between the preoperative and postoperative VASs [mean (SD): 9.2 (1) vs. 1.5 (1)] for all patients. We did not report any incidental durotomy, neurological deficits or mortality in this study. One patient had superficial wound infection. The study is limited by small population, short follow-up and not reporting stability or spondylolisthesis.

conclusionA modified tubular discectomy technique with safe scar dissection is effective for RLDH treatment. Technically, the only scar needed to be dissected is the scar lateral to the exposed normal dura and the scar extended caudally till the level of the superior end plate of the targeted disc space where the scar can be entered ventrally and the disc fragment retrieved. Adherence to the step-by-step procedure described in our study will help surgeons operate with more confidence and minimize complications of recurrent lumbar disc herniation.

Indexed as

Intervertebral Disc DisplacementCicatrixDiskectomyHumansLumbar VertebraePainTreatment OutcomeDurotomyMinimally invasive spineRecurrent lumbar disc herniationScar

Identifiers

PMID37798790
PMCPMC10552325

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.