ReviewBrain & spine2025
Indications for surgery versus conservative treatment in the management of lumbar disc herniations: A systematic review.
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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Lumbar disc herniation].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Risk factors for residual low back pain at twelve months after low-temperature plasma radiofrequency ablation in lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective cohort study.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Spine Surgery vs. Conventional Approaches for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Oral Corticosteroid Therapy in Lumbar Radiculopathy: Evidence From Randomized Controlled Trials.Cureus · 2026Review
- Single-Step Extrusion Printing of Microgrooved Annulus Fibrosus Scaffolds via Patterned Nozzles.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- The Biomechanical Landscape of Lumbar Disc Herniation: Mechanobiological Insights Into Injury and Regeneration.Neurospine · 2026Review
- Construction and Validation of a Nomogram Prediction Model for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation After Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Biological Mechanisms of Pain Management in Lumbar Disk Herniation: Focus on Cytokine Correlations and Therapeutic Approaches.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Integrating multi-omics and machine learning to explore the role of amino acid metabolism in intervertebral disk degeneration.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
- Mechanism-guided biomaterial strategies for intervertebral disc degeneration: Pathological heterogeneity, functional classification, and translational perspectives.Journal of tissue engineeringReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.