Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38217013›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024

Comparison of bone reamer and trephine for foraminoplasty in percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy based on 3D slicer and Digimizer software.

Jiewei Sun, Jun Wang, Ruiji Wu, Zhi Zhao, Bingkai Fan, Jie Cai, Fabo Feng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Jiewei SunCardiothoracic Surgery Department, The First People's Hospital of Fuyang, No. 429, Beihuan Road, Fuchun Street, Fuyang District, Hangzhou, 311400, Zhejiang, China.
Jun WangThe orthopaedic, Xiaoshan Hospital Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Ruiji WuSecond Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, 310005, Zhejiang, China.
Zhi ZhaoThe orthopaedic, Xiaoshan Hospital Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Bingkai FanThe orthopaedic, Xiaoshan Hospital Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Jie CaiThe orthopaedic, Xiaoshan Hospital Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Fabo FengCenter for Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Orthopedics, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital (Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College), Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China. fengfabo@hmc.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore the applicability of bone reamer and trephine for foraminoscopy in percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD), and to provide a theoretical basis for foraminoplasty options in clinical practice.

methodsThis study was a prospective cohort study. Sixty-three consecutive patients who underwent PELD for lumbar disc herniation between May 2021 and July 2022 were analysed. Foraminoplasty were performed by bone reamer or trephine. The amount of bone removed and the foramen area enlarged during foraminoplasty by both tools were measured by 3D slicer and Digimizer software, and the numbers of fluoroscopic views were recorded.

resultsThe bone reamer removed less bone in the Superior Articular Process (SAP) than the trephine (t = 17.507, P < 0.001), and the area enlarged by the bone reamer was smaller than that of the trephine (t = 10.042, P = 0.002). The overall numbers of fluoroscopic views were significantly more in the bone reamer group than in the trephine group (t = 19.003, P < 0.001). In the bone reamer group, when the area of preoperative (FPZ) was no less than 54.55 mm

conclusionBone reamer was safer and trephine was more efficient for foraminoscopy in PELD. An area of preoperative (FPZ) of 54.55 mm

Indexed as

Diskectomy, PercutaneousIntervertebral Disc DisplacementEndoscopyHumansLumbar VertebraeProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome3D slicerBone reamerDigimizerForaminoplastyTrephine

Identifiers

PMID38217013
PMCPMC10785399

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.