ArticleActa neurochirurgica2024
Inferior long-term outcomes after surgery for lumbar disc herniation in patients with prior lumbar spine surgery.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2024. 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.
- Comparative analysis of the efficacy and functional recovery of unilateral biportal endoscopy-assisted lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Prospective Clinical Study to Evaluate Safety and Performance of an Intra-Surgical Hydraulic Distractor During Spinal Surgeries.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Do revision lumbar spine procedures lead to worse postoperative outcomes? A systematic review with a meta-analysis of patient-reported outcomes.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious lumbar spine surgery is a frequent exclusion criterion for studies evaluating lumbar surgery outcomes. In real-life clinical settings, this patient population is important, as a notable proportion of patients evaluated for lumbar spine surgery have undergone prior lumbar surgery already previously. Knowledge about the long-term outcomes after microdiscectomy on patients with previous lumbar surgery and how they compare to those of first-time surgery is lacking.
methodsThe original patient cohort for screening included 615 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for lumbar disc herniation, with a median follow-up time of 18.1 years. Of these patients, 89 (19%) had undergone lumbar spine surgery prior to the index surgery. Propensity score matching (based on age, sex, and follow-up time) was utilized to match two patients without prior surgery with each patient with a previous surgery. The primary outcome measure was the need for further lumbar spine surgery during the follow-up period, and the secondary outcome measures consisted of present-time patient-reported outcome measures (Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQol-5D) and present-time ability to carry out employment.
resultsPatients who received previous lumbar surgeries had a higher need for further surgery (44% vs. 28%, p = 0.009) and had a shorter time to further surgery than the propensity score-matched cohort (mean Kaplan-Meier estimate, 15.7 years vs. 19.8 years, p = 0.008). Patients with prior surgery reported inferior Oswestry Disability Index scores (13.7 vs. 8.0, p = 0.036). and EQ-5D scores (0.77 vs. 0.86, p = 0.01). In addition, they had a higher frequency of receiving lumbar spine-related disability pensions than the other patients (12% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.01).
conclusionsPatients with previous lumbar surgery had inferior long-term outcomes compared to patients without prior surgery. However, the vast majority of these patients improved quickly after the index surgery. Furthermore, the difference in the patients' reported outcomes was small at the long-term follow-up, and they reported high satisfaction with the results of the study surgery. Hence, surgery for these patients should be considered if surgical indications are met, but special care needs must be accounted for when deliberating upon their indications for surgery.
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.