ArticleFrontiers in surgery2025
Full-endoscopic decompression surgery in the treatment of elderly patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.
Article 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.
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
Objective: To introduce the technical protocol of the full-endoscopic decompression surgery (FEDS) in the treatment of elderly patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) and evaluate its clinical efficacy compared with posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PTLIF). Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 82 elderly patients (aged ≥70 years) with DLSS, including 45 patients who underwent FEDS (FEDS group) and 37 patients who underwent PTLIF (PTLIF group). General data including age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, surgical segment, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) for low back pain and leg pain, and preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were compared between the two groups. VAS for low back pain, VAS for leg pain, and ODI were recorded at 6 weeks, 6 months, and the last follow-up after surgery. Operation-related parameters such as operation time and length of hospital stay were recorded. Early and late complications were also compared between the two groups to assess their safety and efficacy. Results: The average age of patients in the FEDS group was 75.6 years, older than that in the PTLIF group (74.1 years, Conclusion: FEDS is as effective as PTLIF in the treatment of elderly patients with DLSS.
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.