ArticleNeurospine2024
Evolving Paradigms in Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review of the Learning Curves in Minimally Invasive Spine Techniques.
Article in Neurospine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk factors for surgical site infections after spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.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
- Material and Geometric Innovations in Lumbar and Cervical Interbody Devices: A Systematic Scoping Review.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Review
- Minimally invasive approaches to intramedullary spinal cord tumors: a systematic review of techniques and outcomes.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
- O-Arm Navigation Enhances Facet Preservation Without Compromising Clinical Outcomes in UBE Decompression for Radiographically Stable Adult Degenerative Scoliosis: A Single-Center Comparative Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Validation of the VIEW score: a novel intraoperative grading scale for visualization in endoscopic spine surgery.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
- A Systematic Review of Complication Management During Uniportal and Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Dural Tear and Bleeding.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Improvement in low back pain following endoscopic decompression for spinal stenosis.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Learning curve in full-endoscopic lumbar surgery for disc herniation in a spine clinic in Mexico: Comparative analysis of IELD and TELD techniques.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Endoscopic resection of lumbar intradural spinal tumors: A case series on feasibility, safety, and preliminary outcomes.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Shaping the modern spine surgeon: core competencies for a digital era.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Use of Double Cages for Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparison of 3-Dimensional-Printed Titanium and Polyetheretherketone Cages.International journal of spine surgery · 2025Article
- Current Trends and Future Directions in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Review of Emerging Techniques and Evolving Management Paradigms.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Long-Term Outcomes of Minimally Invasive vs. Traditional Open Spinal Fusion: A Comparative Analysis.Journal of spine research and surgery · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Our research examines the learning curves of various minimally invasive lumbar surgeries to determine the benefits and challenges they pose to both surgeons and patients. The advent of microsurgical techniques since the 1960s, including advances in fluoroscopic navigation and intraoperative computed tomography, has significantly shifted spinal surgery from open to minimally invasive methods. This study critically evaluates surgical duration, intraoperative conversions to open surgery, and complications as primary parameters to gauge these learning curves. Through a comprehensive literature search up to March 2024, involving databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, this paper identifies a steep learning curve associated with these surgeries. Despite their proven advantages in reducing recovery time and surgical trauma, these procedures require surgeons to master advanced technology and equipment, which can directly impact patient outcomes. The study underscores the need for well-defined learning curves to facilitate efficient training and enhance surgical proficiency, especially for novice surgeons. Moreover, it addresses the implications of technology on surgical accuracy and the subsequent effects on complication rates, providing insights into the complex dynamics of adopting new surgical innovations in spinal health care.
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.