ArticleJournal of pain research2025
Interlaminar Endoscopic Treatment of Adjacent Segment Disease After Posterior Instrumented Lumbar Fusion.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of interlaminar endoscopic surgery for the treatment of adjacent segment disease (ASD) after posterior instrumented lumbar fusion. Materials and Methods: Between January 2019 and March 2023, the data of 22 patients with ASD who underwent revision interlaminar technique (R-ILT) endoscopic surgery after posterior instrumented lumbar fusion were retrospectively analyzed. For comparison, the data of 30 patients with single segment lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent primary interlaminar technique (P-ILT) endoscopic surgery were collected. The patient demographics and perioperative indicators were recorded and the clinical outcomes were analyzed with relevant evaluation scales. The surgical satisfaction was assessed using the modified MacNab criteria, lumbar stability was evaluated using the change in dynamic position radiographs of the spine at the final follow-up. Results: There were no statistical differences in patient demographics. The operation time, blood loss, fluoroscopy time, and the incidence of dural sac tears were higher in R-ILT group ( Conclusion: Interlaminar endoscopic surgery is a feasible option for treating ASD. However, due to the impact of the initial operation, the difficulty and risk of reoperation have increased; therefore, surgical indications must be strictly controlled, and superb surgical skills are required.
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.