Observational studyMedicine2025
Early versus delayed surgery for sciatica: A single-center observational study.
Observational study in Medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lumbar discectomy can improve symptoms of sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation (LDH) faster than conservative treatment. However, the optimal timing of surgery for LDH has scarcely been explored. The prospectively collected clinical outcome data from patients who underwent microdiscectomy for sciatica due to LDH were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the duration of sciatica before surgery: early surgery (<6 months); and delayed surgery (≥6 months). Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for low back pain (LBP), leg pain (LP), and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were compared between the 2 groups preoperatively, and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. In total, 122 and 115 patients comprised the early and delayed surgery groups, respectively. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of sex, age, body mass index, comorbidities, surgical procedure, surgical segment, preoperative LBP, LP VAS scores, or ODI. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the delayed surgery group were prescribed opioids preoperatively versus those in the early surgery group (25.2% vs 10.7%, respectively; P = .003). The duration of sciatica was significantly shorter in the early surgery group than that in the delayed surgery group (3.9 vs 12.2 months; P < .001). LBP VAS scores were significantly lower in the early versus delayed surgery group at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. Additionally, LP VAS scores and ODI in the early surgery group were significantly lower than those in the delayed surgery group at 1 month postoperatively. There was no significant difference in complication rates between the 2 groups (5.7% vs 5.2%; P = .860). Compared with delayed surgery, early surgery improved pain and disability in patients diagnosed with sciatica. However, this advantage tended to decline over time postoperatively, resulting in comparable long-term outcomes.
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.