ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine
An assessment of the variation in the practice of lumbar discectomy and its role in axial back pain.
Article in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Persistent pelvic pain in women: unraveling diagnostic challenges and the overlooked role of pelvic congestion syndrome.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Management of recurrent lumbar disc herniation: a comparative analysis of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and repeat discectomy.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- Advancing insights into recurrent lumbar disc herniation: A comparative analysis of surgical approaches and a new classification.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 9 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lumbar discectomy is performed for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation and is one of the most widely performed spinal surgical procedures worldwide in a variety of ways. This survey aimed at providing an overview/perspective of different practice patterns and the impact of lumbar discectomy on axial back pain with or without sciatica. Methods: An online survey was performed using the application "Google Forms." The link to the questionnaire was distributed to neurosurgeons through personal E-mail and social media platforms. Results: We received 333 responses. The largest percentage of responses across five continents was from Asia (66.97%, n = 223). The mean age of the respondents was 40.08 ± 10.5 years. A total of 66 respondents (20%) had a spine practice of 7%-90%, and 28 respondents had a spine practice of 90%-100% (8.4%). The number of respondents who practiced microscopic discectomy using a tubular retractor ( Conclusions: Our survey revealed that only 22.2% of spine surgeons recommended discectomy in patients with radiological disc herniation with axial back pain alone and preferred a minimally invasive method of discectomy. Almost half of them believed discectomy to be ineffective for axial low back pain and only a few recommended prolonged bed rest postoperatively.
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.