Observational studyJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024
Recovery pattern after decompression of central lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective observational cohort study.
Observational study 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. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrative genomic analysis identifies key target genes and candidate drugs for spinal stenosis.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2026Article
- Patient-reported outcomes and their associated factors at 1- and 2-year follow-up after lumbar spine surgery: a surgery registry study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Cross-cultural validation of the Fukushima lumbar spinal stenosis scale in Korean patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Comparison of treatment outcomes and analysis of factors interfering with efficacy in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis undergoing unilateral unichannel and bichannel endoscopic ULBD surgery.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDetailed preoperative information is associated with superior outcomes. We aimed to describe the recovery pattern after decompression of central lumbar spinal stenosis (CLSS).
methods50 patients aged 51-85 years who underwent decompression without fusion due to CLSS were followed from before to after surgery (post-op day 1, 7, and 14). Back and leg pain were evaluated using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS; 0 = no pain 0, 10 = worst pain) and quality of life using the EuroQol-5D index (0 = death, 1 = best), and EQ-5D-visual analogue scale (VAS; 0 = worst, 100 = best).
resultsNRS leg pain was reduced from preoperative to first postoperative day by 5.2 (6.1, 4.3) (mean (95%CI)], and NRS back pain from postoperative day 1-7 by 0.6 (1.2, 0.03) and from day 7 to 14 by 0.7 (1.3, 0.2)]. In contrast, EQ-5D index increased from preoperative to first postoperative day by 0.09 (0.06, 0.13) and from day 1 to 7 by 0.05 (0.02,0.08), and EQ-5D VAS from preoperative to first postoperative day by 13.7 (9.1, 18.3) and from day 1 to 7 by 6.0 (2.0, 10.0). After two weeks, 51% of the patients had improved above the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in back pain and 71% in leg pain.
conclusionsPatients scheduled for decompression due to CLSS should be informed that improvement in leg pain and quality of life in general can be expected within one day of surgery, that quality of life improves a little further in the first postoperative week, and that back pain improves in the first 2 postoperative weeks. In most patients, decompression without fusion due to CLSS seems to achieve clinically relevant improvement within 2 weeks.
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.