ArticleSpine surgery and related research2024
Comparative Evaluation of Postoperative Epidural Hematoma after Lumbar Microendoscopic Laminotomy: The Utility of Ultrasonography versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Postoperative spinal epidural hematoma (PSEH) is a severe complication of spinal surgery that necessitates accurate and timely diagnosis. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of ultrasonography as an alternative diagnostic tool for PSEH after microendoscopic laminotomy (MEL) for lumbar spinal stenosis, comparing it with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Methods: A total of 65 patients who underwent MEL were evaluated using both ultrasound- and MRI-based classifications for PSEH. Intra- and interrater reliabilities were analyzed. Furthermore, ethical standards were strictly followed, with spine surgeons certified by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association performing evaluations. Results: Among the 65 patients, 91 vertebral segments were assessed. The intra- and interrater agreements for PSEH classification were almost perfect for both ultrasound (κ=0.824 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.729-0.918] and κ=0.810 [95% CI 0.712-0.909], respectively) and MRI (κ=0.839 [95% CI 0.748-0.931] and κ=0.853 [95% CI 0.764-0.942], respectively). The results showed high concordance between ultrasound- and MRI-based classifications, validating the reliability of ultrasound in postoperative PSEH evaluation. Conclusions: This study presents a significant advancement by introducing ultrasound as a precise and practical alternative to MRI for PSEH evaluation. The comparable accuracy of ultrasound to MRI, rapid bedside assessments, and radiation-free nature make it valuable for routine postoperative evaluations. Despite the limitations related to specific surgical contexts and clinical outcome assessment, the clinical potential of ultrasound is evident. It offers clinicians a faster, cost-effective, and repeatable diagnostic option, potentially enhancing patient care. This study establishes the utility of ultrasound in evaluating postoperative spinal epidural hematomas after MEL. With high concordance to MRI, ultrasound emerges as a reliable, practical, and innovative tool, promising improved diagnostic efficiency and patient outcomes. Further studies should explore its clinical impact across diverse surgical scenarios.
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.