ArticleCureus2023
Retrospective Study of Minimal Three-Year Follow-Up of Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: 5000 Multicenter Cases.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcome measurements in patients with a lumbar disc herniation - a scoping review.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- The Effect of Transcutaneous Electrical Acupuncture Stimulation on Postoperative Pain Control and Mobility in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy: Study Protocol for a Prospective Randomized Trial.Journal of pain research · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the long-term effects of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PTELD) and clarify the differences between outside-in and inside-out techniques. Methodology This was a multicenter retrospective study with a chart review of questionnaires about patients' quality of life. Patients were recruited from three hospitals in China. Based on certain inclusion and exclusion criteria, we enrolled in the study 5000 patients aged ≥18 years diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation who received PTELD from September 2015 to September 2019. The outside-in technique (n=2039) was compared with the inside-out technique for PTELD (n=1890) on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the Short Form 36 (SF-36) of the Health Survey Questionnaire (physical component) both pre-operatively and post-operatively. Results VAS, ODI, and SF-36 significantly improved just after surgery for both techniques compared with pre-operative status. Nevertheless, significant differences existed between the two techniques concerning VAS for leg pain, VAS for back pain, ODI, and SF-36 at 0.5 months post-operatively. The above indices steadily improved within six months after both techniques, after which they did not significantly improve. In detail, outside-in patients suffered more back pain and worse ODI and SF-36 (physical) but had more relief from leg pain 0.5 months after surgery in terms of VAS. As for recovery rate from symptoms, there were only significant differences in recovery rate for leg pain and back pain at the first 1.5 months post-operatively. As for satisfaction rates, the outside-in technique had better results than the inside-out technique at both 0.5 months and 12 months. Conclusion Both techniques could relieve the symptoms of lumbar disc herniation. However, patients in the outside-in group suffered more back pain and a bigger risk of nerve injury than those in the inside-out group.
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.