ArticleAsian spine journal2025
The influence of obesity on the outcomes of endoscopic spinal surgery: a meta-analysis.
Article in Asian spine journal, 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.
- Early Discontinuation of Prophylactic Antibiotics Is Not Associated with Increased Surgical Site Infection Risk in Spine Surgery: A Nationwide Cohort Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Obesity is an escalating health problem that has been increasingly associated with surgical complications. In general, open surgical techniques worsen these complications, because they are more tissue-destructive and associated with a relatively long recovery period. Minimally invasive techniques, such as endoscopic spine surgery, appear to be good substitutes, because they reduce tissue iatrogenic injury and hasten recovery. However, the effect of obesity on the performance of endoscopic spine surgery remains uncertain. This metaanalysis was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic spine surgery in patients with obesity compared with those without obesity. This study adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. We conducted a thorough search using PubMed, Scopus, and Virtual Health Library. Methodological quality was assessed using the MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies) criteria. Mean differences (MD) and standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Statistical analyses were conducted using Review manager ver. 5.4.1. Seven studies involving 659 participants were analyzed. The obese and nonobese groups had no significant differences in operative time (MD, 9.86 minutes; 95% CI, -4.93 to 24.65); Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for back pain at 3 months (MD, 0.26; 95% CI, -0.11 to 0.63), 6 months (MD, 0.26; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.56), and 12 months (MD, -0.54; 95% CI, -1.70 to 0.62); VAS leg pain scores at 3 months (MD, 0.17; 95% CI, -0.06 to 0.41), 6 months (MD, 0.23; 95% CI, -0.13 to 0.59), and 12 months (MD, 0.18; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.45); Oswestry Disability Index scores at 3 months (MD, 1.02; 95% CI, -0.14 to 2.18) and 12 months (MD, 0.10; 95% CI, -1.14 to 1.33); and reherniation rate (odds ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.73 to 2.49). Endoscopic surgery demonstrated no significant differences in outcomes between obese and nonobese patients and was safe and effective for this patient population.
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.