ReviewFrontiers in surgery2024
Open laminectomy vs. minimally invasive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a review.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Minimally invasive tubular decompression versus traditional open surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Association of diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis with postoperative outcomes following surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disease.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Endoscopic decompression alone for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of paired change scores.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Review
- Impact of mentorship on the learning curve of unilateral biportal endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis: a cumulative sum analysis across 2 generations of surgeons.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2026Article
- More pronounced effects of the extent of discectomy over the extent of laminectomy on postoperative biomechanics and clinical outcomes in unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar disc herniation.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Article
- Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression for two-level adjacent lumbar spinal stenosis through a single sliding approach: technical report and early follow-up.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- How I do it-tubular trans-spinous process muscle-sparing approach for bilateral lumbar microdiscectomy: surgical technique with illustrative video.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- Temporary Relative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis After Skip Partial Laminectomies in an Elderly Woman: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- [Unilateral biportal endoscopy-assisted decompression strategy for lateral lumbar spinal stenosis].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2025Article
- 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
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) refers to a narrowing of the space within the spinal canal, which can occur at any level but is most common in the lumbar spine. Open laminectomy and minimally invasive laminectomy (MIL) procedures are the most common surgical gold standard techniques for treating LSS. This study aims to review clinical and biomechanical literature to draw comparisons between open laminectomy and various MIL techniques. The MIL variation comprises microendoscopic decompression laminotomy, unilateral partial hemilaminectomy, and microendoscopic laminectomy. Methods: A review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We reviewed 25 clinical, 6 finite element, and 3 cadaveric studies associated with treating LSS. We reviewed literature that discusses factors such as operation time, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, reoperation rate, effect on elderly patients, patients' satisfaction, and adjacent segment disease degeneration for the clinical studies, whereas the range of motion (ROM), von Mises stresses, and stability was compared in biomechanical studies. Results: MIL involves less bone and ligament removal, resulting in shorter hospital stays and lower reoperation and complication rates than open laminectomy. It improves the quality of health-related living standards and reduces postoperative pain. Biomechanical studies suggest that laminectomy and facetectomy increase annulus stress and ROM, leading to segmental instability. Conclusion: Although theoretically, MIL means less tissue injury, pain, and faster recovery in the short term, the long-term results depend on the adequacy of the decompression procedure and tend to be independent of MIL or open laminectomy.
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.