ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Study of Lumbar Disc Prolapse Surgery With or Without Coagulation: A Report of 2,180 Cases.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lumbar disc prolapse surgery is among the most common neurosurgical procedures performed worldwide. To our knowledge, this is the first report of the largest series comparing prolapsed lumbar disc surgery with and without coagulation. Previous studies have shown that coagulation during surgery may be associated with higher morbidity, particularly in terms of infection rates. This study aims to investigate the necessity of coagulation during lumbar microdiscectomy, specifically whether coagulation is required to control bleeding in the disc space, surrounding ligaments, or other tissues during the procedure. A total of 2,180 cases were retrospectively analyzed from 2010 to 2020, with a minimum follow-up of two years. The study compared the effect of coagulation on outcomes for lumbar microdiscectomy, specifically evaluating quality of life through the PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) score. PROMIS was used to assess both physical and mental health outcomes before and after surgery. The data were collected from a single center. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 (coagulation) and Group 2 (no coagulation). The PROMIS score was obtained preoperatively and postoperatively using the online "ortho-toolkit" questionnaires, and the average scores for both groups were calculated to assess their overall health status. The average preoperative physical health score (PHS T-score) was 32.4 for Group 1 and 31.3 for Group 2. Postoperatively, the scores were 54.1 for Group 1 and 56.2 for Group 2. Similarly, the average preoperative mental health score (MHS T-score) was 41.1 for Group 1 and 39.7 for Group 2, with postoperative scores of 48.3 for Group 1 and 52.8 for Group 2. Lumbar disc prolapse surgery without coagulation is safe and effective. There is no difference in outcome using coagulation or not in lumbar disc prolapse surgery, and its use is not obligatory.
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.