ArticleAsian journal of neurosurgery2025
A Comparative Analysis of Radiographic Intervertebral Disc Height Following Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy: Interlaminar versus Transforaminal Approach.
Article in Asian journal of neurosurgery, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study Design: This is a retrospective cohort study. Introduction: Full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy (FELD), a minimally invasive surgical procedure used to treat lumbar disc herniation (LDH), has been shown to be highly effective with fewer complications. This procedure can be performed using the interlaminar (IL) or transforaminal (TF) approach. The IL approach involves more anatomical structures than the TF approach. However, comprehensive data regarding preoperative and postoperative intervertebral disc height (IDH) changes for patients undergoing full-endoscopic discectomy through the IL versus the TF approach is yet to be documented. Objective: To compare the preoperative and postoperative IDH on radiographs in patients who underwent the FELD using the IL or TF approach. Materials and Methods: The medical records of patients diagnosed with LDH who underwent FELD between 2014 and 2022 were collected and analyzed. Pre- and postradiographic IDH and clinical scores, including visual analog scale-back pain (VAS-B), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and recurrent LDH, were assessed and compared over a follow-up period of at least 2 years. Results: A total of 110 patients were included, 82 undergoing the IL procedure and 28 undergoing the TF procedure. The median IDH variance was consistent at 1.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 0.5, 2) for the IL and TF procedures, indicating no significant statistical variance. The IDH ratio was also comparable between the two groups, with the IL group at 84% and the TF group at 85%. However, a notable disparity was observed in postoperative IDH, with a median of 7.5 (IQR 6.5, 8.5) for the IL approach and 8.5 (IQR 7, 9.5) for the TF approach. Importantly, no statistical differences were found in clinical outcomes, including VAS-B, ODI, and recurrent LDH. Conclusion: After a 2-year follow-up for FELD, there is no significant difference in radiographic outcomes, IDH difference, and IDH ratio between the IL and TF approaches. Additionally, there is no apparent correlation between reductions in IDH and IDH ratio and the decrease in back pain scores (VAS-B) or ODI after the procedures.
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.