ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
Comparison of spinal anesthesia and local anesthesia in percutaneous interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy for L5/S1 disc herniation: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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.
- The Optimal Effective Concentration of Spinal Anesthesia for Interlaminar Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy: An Approach Based on the Biased Coin Design.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy vs Percutaneous Interlaminar Endoscopic Discectomy for L5 to S1 Disc Herniation: A Prospective Comparative Study With Quasirandom Allocation.International journal of spine surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of clinical effectiveness between interlaminar and transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy for L4/5 highly migrated lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective study with a minimum one year follow-up.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Recovery Profiles and Well-Being Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Various Anaesthesia Techniques: A Systematic Review.Health science reports · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInterlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy (IELD) is a prevalent method for managing lumbar disc herniation. Local anesthesia (LA) is frequently employed during IELD, albeit with its merits and drawbacks. The spinal anesthesia (SA) represents a feasible anesthetic strategy for IELD; however, the availability of clinical research data is currently limited.
methodsThe propensity score matching was conducted to ensure the comparability of the SA and LA groups. The outcome measures were operation time, intraoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, need for adjuvant analgesia, intraoperative vital signs, blood loss, adverse surgical events, anesthesia-related complications, postoperative bed rest duration, VAS for pain at 2 h postoperatively, Oswestry Disability Index score (ODI), satisfaction with surgical efficacy, and willingness to undergo reoperation at 6 months postoperatively.
resultsFifty-six patients were assigned to each group. Significant differences were found between the groups regarding intraoperative VAS for pain, use of adjuvant analgesics, willingness to undergo reoperation, maximum intraoperative systolic blood pressure, and variability (P < 0.05). Compared to the LA group, the SA group had lower VAS for pain at 2 h postoperatively, a longer operation time, a longer duration of postoperative bedrest, and more anesthesia-related complications (P < 0.05). No significant intergroup differences were detected in intraoperative heart rate variability, blood loss, ODI, satisfaction with surgical efficacy, and surgery-related complications (P > 0.05).
conclusionSA as an alternative anesthesia for IELD surgery holds great promise, exhibiting superior efficacy compared to LA. However, it is crucial to meticulously evaluate the indications due to potential risks associated with this form of anesthesia.
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.