ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2024
Database analysis comparing incidence and complication rates between inpatient and outpatient laminotomies for lumbar disc herniation.
Article in North American Spine Society journal, 2024. 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.
- Dual-Eligible Patient Burden Is Independently Associated With Lower Standardized Reimbursement Among Lumbar Laminectomy Surgeons: A National Medicare Analysis.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- The Biomechanical Landscape of Lumbar Disc Herniation: Mechanobiological Insights Into Injury and Regeneration.Neurospine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common condition that can be characterized with disabling pain. While most patients recover without surgery, some still require operative intervention. The epidemiology and trends of laminotomy for LDH have not been recently studied, and current practice patterns might be different from historical norms. This study aimed to investigate the trends of inpatient and outpatient laminotomies for LDH and compare complication rates between these two sites of service. Methods: A large, national database was utilized to identify patients Results: The average incidence of laminotomy for LDH was 13.0 per 10,000 persons-years. Although the national trend in incidence had not changed from 2009 to 2019, the proportion of outpatient laminotomies significantly increased in this time period (p=.02). Outpatient laminotomies were more common among younger and healthier patients. Patients with inpatient laminotomies had significantly higher rates of surgical site infections (odds ratio [OR] 1.61, p<.001), venous thromboembolism (VTE) (OR 1.96, p<.001), hematoma (OR 1.71, p<.001), urinary tract infections (OR 1.41, p<.001), and acute kidney injuries (OR 1.75, p=.001), even when controlling for selected confounders. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated an increasing trend in the performance of laminotomy for LDH toward the outpatient setting. Even when controlling for certain confounders, patients requiring inpatient procedures had higher rates of postoperative complications. This study highlights the importance of carefully evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of performing these procedures in an outpatient versus inpatient setting.
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.