ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2026
Endoscopic-Assisted Peri-Root Anesthesia Provides Superior Intraoperative Analgesia Over Epidural Anesthesia in L5-S1 Interlaminar Endoscopic Discectomy.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveInterlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy, particularly with the Delta large-channel system, offers significant advantages in treating L5-S1 disc herniation. However, intraoperative pain management under local anesthesia remains challenging. Conventional epidural anesthesia (EA) often leads to unpredictable effects and risks such as motor block. This study proposes a novel endoscopic-assisted peri-root anesthesia (PA) technique to improve analgesic precision and safety.
methodsThis retrospective analysis was conducted on 132 patients who underwent interlaminar endoscopic surgery for L5-S1 disc herniation between January 2022 and December 2023. Patients were divided into PA (n = 65) and EA (n = 67) groups. Perioperative outcomes, including intraoperative pain, motor block incidence, operative time, hospital stay, and complications, were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test, chi-squared test, or Fisher's exact test as appropriate. Anesthesia satisfaction and mid-term functional outcomes (VAS and ODI) were also evaluated.
resultsThe results showed that the PA group had significantly lower intraoperative pain levels (median VAS: 2 [1, 2] vs. 2 [1, 4], p = 0.005) and no cases of unexpected motor block compared to six cases (9.0%) in the EA group (p = 0.028). Patients in the PA group had 2.12 times higher odds of reporting a better satisfaction score on the Likert scale compared to those in the EA group (OR = 2.12, 95% CI: 1.14-3.95, p = 0.018, logistic regression).
conclusionThese findings suggest better immediate neurological preservation with the PA technique, but its long-term efficacy and safety profile, particularly regarding rare complications, still require confirmation through larger, prospective randomized controlled trials with extended follow-up.
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.