ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2025
The utilization of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy in recurrent lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 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.
- Letter to Editor: Practice preference of revision surgery for recurrent lumbar disc herniation: an international survey of AO spine members.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
- Application of the guidewire anchoring technique in lateral approach transforaminal endoscopic lumbar foraminoplasty: a propensity score-matched retrospective study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Advancing lumbar disc herniation treatment: a prospective study on the efficacy and safety of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy under local anesthesia, across symptom severity.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The utilization of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) in lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is well established as a safe, effective intervention. However, in approximately 5-15% of cases herniation recurs. The role of PELD at this juncture is not well established in literature. The aim of this study is to identify the usability of PELD in comparison to other minimally invasive options to treat recurrent lumbar herniated disc. Methods: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Studies with less than 10 patients, published abstracts without full texts, and systematic review papers were excluded. Both transforaminal (TF) and interlaminar (IL) approaches were included. A risk of bias assessment was performed for each study. Results: A total of 614 non-duplicate articles resulted. After applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, 20 papers were selected. Eleven studies were cohort, 1 study was randomized controlled trial, 8 studies were case-series. There were a total of 1,162 patients and 1,165 discs operated on. 714 (61.3%) surgeries were at level L4-5, 390 (33.4%) surgeries were at level L5-S1, and 62 (5.32%) surgeries were at other lumbar levels. 15 studies reported average visual analog scale (VAS) scores or Numerical Rating Score (NRS) of back and leg pain. Pooled weighted averages illustrated a 5.24-point improvement in VAS back scores and a similar 5.26-point improvement in VAS leg scores. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was reported in 5 studies with a pooled weighted average ODI showing an improvement of 20.88 units. All studies reported complications encountered, and the pooled rate across studies were: dural tear (n=10, 0.88%), infection (n=1, 0.09%), transient dysesthesia (n=13, 1.14%), transient headache (n=5, 0.44%), instability (n=8, 0.70%), persistent leg pain (n=7, 0.62%), transient weakness (n=1, 0.09%) permanent neurologic deficit (n=1, 0.09%). Seventeen studies (85%) reported re-recurrence rates of herniated disc after PELD, with a total of 58 recurrences out of 1,018 discs, or 5.70% pooled recurrence rate. A meta-analysis revealed there is currently no evidence of clearly superior approach for managing recurrent LDH between open lumbar microdiscectomy, minimally invasive trans-lumbar interbody fusion, microendoscopic discectomy, and IL Conclusions: PELD is a safe, effective technique in the treatment of recurrent LDH. Clinical judgment is required at this time to identify the best surgical modality of management for each patient.
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.