ReviewFrontiers in surgery2025
Clinical analysis of percutaneous endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression for single segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 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.
- Full-Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression Under Surgeon-Directed Local Anesthesia in Older Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
Background: In recent years, percutaneous endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (PE-ULBD) has been used to treat degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and has achieved good results. Some researchers have conducted statistical analysies and evaluated the efficacy of this technology. In this systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis, the effectiveness of PE-ULBD as a surgical method for treating single segment LSS was evaluated from the perspective of evidence-based medicine. The aim was to provide a scientific basis for the clinical application of this technology in LSS treatment. Methods: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A total of 396 studies published before May 29, 2024 were collected from the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI), and WanFang databases. Results: Eight retrospective studies were found with 287 patients who met the inclusion criteria set for the systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis. We used the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) scale to evaluate the quality of the included studies. The results indicated that significant difference in VAS scores between preoperative and postoperative back and leg pain and the difference between the control results recorded before and after the two types of pain scores was statistically significant ( Conclusion: Our results indicate that the PE-ULBD technique has significant short and long-term clinical efficacy for the treatment of single-segment LSS and is worthy of clinical application and promotion.
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.