Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40590980›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025

Comparison of a progressive bone drilling system and a visualized reaming system in percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy: a comparative study.

Yang Yu, Meng Li, Kuilin Zhang, Qiang Shi

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yang YuDepartment of Orthopaedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC, Division of Life Sciences and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Lujiang Road No. 17, Hefei, 230001, Anhui, China.
Meng LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC, Division of Life Sciences and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Lujiang Road No. 17, Hefei, 230001, Anhui, China.
Kuilin ZhangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Bozhou Orthopedic Hospital, Bozhou, 236800, Anhui, China.
Qiang ShiDepartment of Orthopaedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC, Division of Life Sciences and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Lujiang Road No. 17, Hefei, 230001, Anhui, China. 1922660235@qq.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0702-3702

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPercutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) is an alternative, minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Two foraminoplasty techniques exist, however, insufficient literature exists highlighting the differences between these procedures.

methodsA multicentre retrospective study was conducted in consecutive patients diagnosed with symptomatic LDH who received PTED at spine centres from March 2015 to June 2019. A total of 798 patients were recruited, of whom 432 underwent progressive bone drilling system (PBDS) for foraminoplasty and 366 received a visualized reaming system (VRS).

resultsThe average radiation exposure and operative time in the PBDS group were significantly greater than those in the VRS group (P < 0.05). Compared with those before the operation, the postoperative VAS and ODI scores in both groups were significantly improved (P < 0.05). Additionally, the VAS score for leg pain and the JOA/ODI score in the PBDS group were significantly lower than those in the VRS group at both the 1-week and 1-month follow-up (P < 0.05). The good-to-excellent rates of the PBDS group and VRS group were 90.97% and 81.14%, whereas the complication occurrence rates were 11.80% and 15.30% in the PBDS group and VRS group, respectively.

conclusionPBDS and VRS have acceptable efficacy at a midterm follow-up of 2 years in treating LDH with PTED. Although PBDS is associated with longer intraoperative fluoroscopy and operative times, it should still be considered superior to VRS considering the benefits of fewer complications, quicker pain relief, and functional recovery.

Indexed as

Diskectomy, PercutaneousEndoscopyIntervertebral Disc DisplacementLumbar VertebraeAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeLumbar disc herniationProgressive bone drilling systemPTEDVisualized reaming system

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.