Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41078967›Full record

ReviewBrain & spine2025

Indications for surgery versus conservative treatment in the management of lumbar disc herniations: A systematic review.

Santhosh G Thavarajasingam, Ahmed Salih, Aksaan Arif, Madhur Varadpande, Pratheeshan Sabeshan, Hariharan Subbiah Ponniah, Sree Kanakala, Srikar R Namireddy, Daniele S C Ramsay, Ahkash Thavarajasingam and 4 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain & spine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [Lumbar disc herniation].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

14 authors.

Santhosh G ThavarajasingamImperial Brain & Spine Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Ahmed SalihImperial Brain & Spine Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Aksaan ArifImperial Brain & Spine Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Madhur VaradpandeImperial Brain & Spine Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Pratheeshan SabeshanImperial Brain & Spine Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Hariharan Subbiah PonniahImperial Brain & Spine Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Sree KanakalaImperial Brain & Spine Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Srikar R NamireddyImperial Brain & Spine Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Daniele S C RamsayImperial Brain & Spine Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Ahkash ThavarajasingamImperial Brain & Spine Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Daniel ScurtuDepartment of Neurosurgery, LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany.
Dragan JankovicDepartment of Neurosurgery, LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany.
Andreas KramerDepartment of Neurosurgery, LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany.
Florian RingelDepartment of Neurosurgery, LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a leading cause of radiculopathy and low back pain, contributing significantly to global disability. Management strategies include conservative and surgical treatments, but clinical decision-making lacks standardization, particularly in surgical indications, timing, and criteria for transitioning from conservative management. Research question: What are the surgical indications, criteria for transitioning from conservative to surgical management in LDH, and what role do motor deficits play? Material and methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search across major databases identified 20 studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and RoB 1 tools. A qualitative synthesis was conducted, and the Index of Qualitative Variation (IQV) quantified variability in indications. Results: Among the studies that reported specific indications, imaging-confirmed nerve root compression (reported in 18/20 studies) and severe/refractory pain (reported in 17/20 studies) were the most consistent indications, while thresholds for sensory deficits (reported in 8/20 studies) varied widely. Early surgery (48 h-6 weeks) was associated with superior recovery, particularly for mild/moderate motor deficits graded ≤ MRC 3/4, achieving >90 % recovery rates. Delayed surgery (>6 weeks) resulted in prolonged symptoms and poorer outcomes, especially in severe cases. Transition criteria included a patient-specific combination of failure of conservative therapy (n = 12) after a most frequently 4-6-week trial, neurological progression, and worsening imaging findings. Significant heterogeneity was observed in thresholds for motor and sensory deficits, with high IQV scores for definitions of conservative treatment failure (IQV = 0.96) and motor deficit (IQV = 0.96). Discussion and conclusion: Significant heterogeneity in surgical indications, timing, and decision-making highlights the urgent need for standardized, evidence-based guidelines to optimize clinical decisions and improve outcomes in LDH management.

Indexed as

Conservative managementDecision-making criteriaEarly surgeryEvidence-based guidelinesIndex of qualitative variationLumbar disc herniationMotor deficitsRadiculopathySlipped discSurgical indicationsTransition to surgery

Identifiers

PMID41078967
PMCPMC12513110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.