ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine
The impact of operative level on patient-reported outcome measures following single-level posterior lumbar decompression for disc herniation.
Article in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. 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.
- Fu's subcutaneous needling therapy for intervertebral disk displacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the impact of upper versus lower lumbar decompression on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Materials and Methods: Patients undergoing L1-L2, L2-L3, L4-L5, or L5-S1 single-level elective decompression with 1-year PROMs were identified. Included PROMs were the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg, and Short Form-12 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component scores. Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) were calculated. Multivariable regressions assessed the independent predictive ability of operative level controlling for demographic confounders. Results: Three hundred and forty-six patients were included (94 upper lumbar decompressions). Upper lumbar decompression patients were older (64.0 vs. 46.9, Conclusion: Patients undergoing upper lumbar decompression demonstrated worse PROMs. However, multivariable analyses suggested these differences were attributable to comorbidity burden and BMI, rather than operative level. This suggests that surgeons and patients can expect similar pain and function improvement from upper lumbar decompression when accounting for baseline patient characteristics.
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.