ArticleFrontiers in surgery2025
Unilateral biportal endoscopy for the treatment of adjacent segment disease after lumbar fusion in elderly patients: a matched comparison study.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) is an important minimally invasive surgical treatment option for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). However, to our knowledge, no studies have focused on UBE for treating adjacent segment disease (ASD) after lumbar fusion. Thus, this study aimed to analyze the clinical efficacy of UBE for ASD patients, and further compare it with non-ASD patients. Methods: This retrospective study enrolled consecutive patients who underwent UBE decompression surgery for LSS between January 2022 and March 2024. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 82 patients were divided into study group (42 ASD patients) and control group (42 non-ASD patients matched by sex, surgical level, and age). Surgical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) obtained preoperatively, 3 days postoperatively, and at 3- and 12-month follow-ups, along with the MacNab criteria, cross-sectional area of the dural sac, and incidence of complications. Results: The ASD and non-ASD groups enrolled 42 patients each. Except for the operative time ( Conclusion: UBE demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes and safety in treating ASD patients. It may represent a promising minimally invasive option for elderly patients with multiple comorbidities who cannot tolerate revision surgery.
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.