ArticleJournal of pain research2025
Comparison of Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Surgery (PTES) With MIS-TLIF for Treating Lumbar Degenerative Disease in Obese Patients.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare clinical outcomes of obese patients with lumbar degenerative disease (LDD) receiving either percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic surgery (PTES) or minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Methods: There were 26 patients underwent PTES, and 29 patients were treated with MIS-TLIF between June 2014 and June 2019. Various factors were compared between the two groups, including operation time, blood loss, incision length, fluoroscopy frequency, and hospital stay. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and complications were also recorded. Results: Patients in PTES group showed significantly shorter operation time (54±10min vs 103±18min, P<0.001), lower blood loss (5/2-15mL vs 60/40-100mL, P<0.001), shorter incision length (9±2mm vs 41±3mm, P<0.001), reduced fluoroscopy frequency (5/5-10 times vs 7/6-11 times, P<0.001) and shorter hospital stay (3/2-4 days vs 6/4-8 days, P<0.001) than MIS-TLIF group. No differences in leg VAS scores were found between the two groups. However, PTES group showed significantly lower back VAS scores during follow-ups (P<0.001). At 2-year follow-up, PTES group also had significantly lower ODI scores compared to MIS-TLIF group (12.0±3.6% vs 15.8±4.9%, Conclusion: PTES and MIS-TLIF showed favorable clinical outcomes for LDD in obese patients. Compared with MIS-TLIF, PTES has advantages of less trauma and faster recovery, and can be conducted under local 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.