ReviewFrontiers in surgery2025
Advances in minimally invasive surgical techniques for lumbar disc herniation: a comprehensive review.
Review 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Core Acupoints and Acupoint Combination Patterns for Acupuncture Treatment of Discogenic Low Back Pain: A Data Mining Study.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
- Intraspinal versus Extraspinal Acupotomy Decompression, or Their Combination, for Lumbar Disc Herniation: Protocol for a Three-Arm, Randomized, Single-Blind Controlled Trial.Journal of pain research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common and frequent disease in orthopaedics, which seriously affects patients' physical and mental health as well as their daily life and work. There are various treatment methods for this condition, and different treatment plans should be adopted according to different situations. Traditional open surgery methods are relatively traumatic and have longer recovery times, while minimally invasive spine techniques have advantages such as smaller incisions, less bleeding, higher fusion rates, and faster recovery. This review summarizes the relevant literature on the application of minimally invasive techniques in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation in recent years, analyzes and compares the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches and endoscopic techniques, as well as reduction, decompression, and fusion effects. The aim is to provide reference for surgeons in selecting surgical procedures for the treatment of LDH.
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.