ArticleOrthopedic reviews2025
INNOVATIVE FULL-ENDOSCOPIC DECOMPRESSION TECHNIQUE FOR LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS: PROMISING EARLY RESULTS FROM VIETNAM.
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the early outcomes of full-endoscopic decompression using the outside-in technique via the interlaminar approach for treating lumbar spinal stenosis in Vietnamese patients. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on 25 consecutive patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (16 men and 9 women; mean age ± SD: 65.80 ± 8.41 years) who underwent full-endoscopic decompression. Clinical outcomes were analyzed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at a three-month follow-up. The final outcome was evaluated using the MacNab criteria. Results: Among the 25 patients, the L4-L5 level was the most common site of stenosis (17 patients, 68%), with central canal stenosis observed in 10 patients (40%). The primary causes of stenosis were hypertrophy of the facet joints combined with ligamentum flavum thickening (9 patients, 36%) and disc herniation (11 patients, 44%). Unilateral decompression was performed in 20 patients (80%), while bilateral decompression was required in 5 patients (20%). The mean operative time was 50.96 ± 16.20 minutes, and the average hospital stay was 2.13 ± 0.52 days, with no reported complications. VAS scores for back pain decreased from 7.60 preoperatively to 1.80 at 6 months, and leg pain scores from 7.20 to 1.76. The ODI improved from 76.35 preoperatively to 10.34 at 6 months. MRI results showed a significant increase in the canal cross-sectional area, from 75.78 mm² to 155.2 mm². Based on Mac-Nab criteria, 80% of patients achieved excellent results, 16% good, and 4% fair at 6 months. Conclusions: Full-endoscopic decompression of lumbar canal stenosis demonstrates promising early outcomes. Advances in endoscopic surgical instruments facilitate decompression procedures that can be performed as effectively, if not more so, than traditional open decompression surgery.
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.