ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025
A comparative study of two full-endoscopic foraminoplasty techniques for lumbar disc herniation.
Article in 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, 2025. 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.
- Visualized reamer foraminoplasty in transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy for upward-migrated lumbar disc herniation: a case report with surgical video.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
- Endoscopic-Assisted Peri-Root Anesthesia Provides Superior Intraoperative Analgesia Over Epidural Anesthesia in L5-S1 Interlaminar Endoscopic Discectomy.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Complication assessment in full-endoscopic uniportal lumbar spine surgery: A prospective analysis from 304 patients.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Efficacy of visualized reamer foraminoplasty in transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy: a retrospective controlled study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
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
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the use of the endoscopic drill (ED) with the extra-endoscopic trephine (EET) in treating lumbar disc herniations with regard to efficiency, safety, and clinical outcomes.
methodsFrom January 2022 and June 2023, 136 patients who had the single-level LDH and received the transforaminal endoscopic surgery were divided into two groups according to the foraminoplasty technique: the EET group (n = 69) and the ED group (n = 67). Surgery-related parameters, complications, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS, 0-10), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, 0-100%) were assessed and compared among two groups.
resultsThe mean operation time and the foraminoplasty time of the EET group was significantly shorter than that of the ED group (P < 0.05). Patients in ED group reported less back pain on the VAS during foraminoplasty than EET group. Although the total complication rate was similar between two groups, the incidence of neural irritation in ED group was significantly lower than that in the EET group. There were no significant differences in VAS or ODI scores at each follow-up visit between two groups.
conclusionsThe application of EET and ED were both effective for full-endoscopic foraminoplasty, and have achieved good clinical outcomes. Although the efficiency of EET is higher than that of ED, it faces some problems during use, such as a high risk of neural irritation, intense intraoperative pain, and the trephine displacement. The ED technique is safe and controllable, which can be used as an ideal method for supplementary foraminoplasty.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39810039What 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.