Observational studyEuropean radiology2025
Patient experience following CT-guided percutaneous lumbar discectomy under local anesthesia: a prospective study.
Observational study in European radiology, 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.
- A novel multimodal AI-based radiomics approach for precision assessment of pain intensity in chronic nonspecific low back pain.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate procedural pain during CT-guided percutaneous lumbar discectomy (PLD) under local anesthesia to treat disc herniation and assess patient satisfaction at 6 months post-treatment. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective observational study enrolled patients who underwent the procedure between December 2019 and April 2021. Patients were selected based on lumbar radiculalgia refractory to medical treatment and infiltrations, with disc herniation confirmed via MRI. Procedural pain was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) and a questionnaire immediately after the procedure, while patient satisfaction was evaluated through a questionnaire at 6 months post-treatment. Pain perception during the intervention, tolerability, and willingness to undergo the procedure again were examined. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, appropriate tests for variable types, and multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of procedural pain (VAS > 5).
results90 patients (mean age, 56 ± 16; 43 men) were enrolled. The median pain reported during the procedure was 5, and 87% of patients rated the experience as tolerable or perfectly tolerable. Disc degeneration (Pfirrmann grades 3 and above) was significantly correlated with increased pain intensity during the procedure (p < 0.05). At the 6-month follow-up, 81% of patients expressed satisfaction with the treatment outcomes, and 94% indicated they would recommend the procedure to others with similar conditions.
conclusionCT-guided percutaneous discectomy under local anesthesia is well-tolerated, with manageable procedural pain and high levels of patient satisfaction. The use of local anesthesia enables real-time clinical evaluation, enhances procedural safety, and minimizes the risk of nerve injuries. KEY POINTS: Question CT-guided PLD is a minimally invasive technique that can be performed under local anesthesia; however, studies have not evaluated per-procedural pain or long-term satisfaction. Findings Patients treated under local anesthesia reported a median pain score of 5/10 during the procedure, with 82,7% expressing satisfaction with the outcomes at 6 months. Clinical relevance CT-guided PLD is a procedure that can be performed under local anesthesia, offering acceptable tolerance and a high rate of patient satisfaction for those suffering from radiculalgia related to a disc herniation refractory to infiltrations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40481872What 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.