ArticleNeurospine2024
Biomechanical Evaluation of 2 Endoscopic Spine Surgery Methods for Treating Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Finite Element Study.
Article in Neurospine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomechanical analysis of lumbar oblique manipulation for lumbar disc herniation with different protrusion subtypes.Mechanobiology in medicine · 2026Article
- [Risk factor analysis of excessive resection of facet joint after large-channel spinal endoscopic depression for degenerative lumbar diseases].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Article
- Biomechanical analysis of the interlaminar dynamic stabilization system (IntraSPINE) in unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for huge lumbar disc herniation: a finite element study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- The Biomechanical Landscape of Lumbar Disc Herniation: Mechanobiological Insights Into Injury and Regeneration.Neurospine · 2026Review
- Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Patients With Lumbar Disc Herniation With Radiculopathy in South Korea.Neurospine · 2025Article
- Far-Lateral Transforaminal Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniations.Neurospine · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of extended endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (EELF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): a prospective observational study.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Impact of BMI, osteoporosis, and disc degeneration on post-UBE lumbar stability: a finite element analysis of nonlinear synergistic effects.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Biomechanical changes in lumbar intervertebral discs after percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy surgery at different Body Mass Index (BMI) categories.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the effects of 2 endoscopic spine surgeries on the biomechanical properties of normal and osteoporotic spines.
methodsBased on computed tomography images of a healthy adult volunteer, 6 finite element models were created. After validating the normal intact model, a concentrated force of 400 N and a moment of 7.5 Nm were exerted on the upper surface of L3 to simulate 6 physiological activities of the spine. Five types of indices were used to assess the biomechanical properties of the 6 models, range of motion (ROM), maximum displacement value, intervertebral disc stress, maximum stress value, and articular protrusion stress, and by combining them with finite element stress cloud.
resultsIn normal and osteoporotic spines, there was no meaningful change in ROM or disc stress in the 2 surgical models for the 6 motion states. Model N1 (osteoporotic percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy model) showed a decrease in maximum displacement value of 20.28% in right lateral bending. Model M2 (unilateral biportal endoscopic model) increased maximum displacement values of 16.88% and 17.82% during left and right lateral bending, respectively. The maximum stress value of L4-5 increased by 11.72% for model M2 during left rotation. In addition, using the same surgical approach, ROM, maximum displacement values, disc stress, and maximum stress values were more significant in the osteoporotic model than in the normal model.
conclusionIn both normal and osteoporotic spines, both surgical approaches were less disruptive to the physiologic structure of the spine. Furthermore, using the same endoscopic spine surgery, normal spine biomechanical properties are superior to osteoporotic spines.
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.