Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38268688›Full record

ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine

Endoscopic versus microscopic discectomy for pathologies of lumbar spine: A nationwide cross-sectional study from a lower-middle-income country.

Bhavya Pahwa, Anish Tayal, Dhiman Chowdhury, Giuseppe Emmanuele Umana, Bipin Chaurasia

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Social media best practices for the spine care professional.North American Spine Society journal · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Bhavya PahwaDepartment of Neurosurgery, University College of Medical Sciences and GTB Hospital, Delhi, India.
Anish TayalDepartment of Neurosurgery, University College of Medical Sciences and GTB Hospital, Delhi, India.
Dhiman ChowdhuryDepartment of Neurosurgery, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Giuseppe Emmanuele UmanaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Trauma and Gamma Knief Center, Cannizaro Hospital, Catania, Italy.
Bipin ChaurasiaNeurosurgery Clinic, Birgunj, Nepal.
Bir Hospital · NPGuru Teg Bahadur Hospital · INUniversity College of Medical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: We conducted a cross-sectional study to assess the preference of spine surgeons between MD for microdiscectomy and endoscopic discectomy (ED) surgery for the management of lumbar pathologies in a lower-middle-income country (LMIC). Methodology: An online survey assessing the preference of spine surgeons for various lumbar pathologies was developed and disseminated in "Neurosurgery Cocktail" a social media platform. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software with a level of significance <0.05. Results: We received responses from 160 spine surgeons having a median experience of 6.75 years (range 0-42 years) after residency. Most of the spine surgeons preferred MD over ED, preference being homogeneous across all lumbar pathologies. In ED, the interlaminar approach was preferred more frequently than the transforaminal approach. The most commonly chosen contraindication for the interlaminar approach and transforaminal approach was ≥ 3 levels lumbar disc herniation (LDH) ( Conclusion: Spine surgeons were inclined toward MD over ED, due to various reasons, such as a steep learning curve, lack of training opportunities, and upfront expenses. There is a pressing need for the upliftment of ED in LMICs which requires global action.

Indexed as

Interlaminar endoscopic surgerylumbar discmicrodiscectomytransforaminal endoscopic surgery

Identifiers

PMID38268688
PMCPMC10805162
OpenAlexW4389132312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.