ArticleJournal of pain research2026
A Comparative Analysis of Ultrasound versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy: Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial Targeting Lumbar Disc Herniation.
Article in Journal of pain research, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a prevalent cause of chronic disability that often necessitates surgical intervention when conservative treatments fail. This study aims to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (UG-TELD) against fluoroscopy-guided transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (FG-TELD) in a single-center, parallel, block-randomized trial involving 80 adult patients aged 18 to 75 years with MRI-confirmed radiculopathy unresponsive to at least six weeks of conservative management. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive either UG-TELD or FG-TELD, adhering to strict exclusion criteria such as prior spinal surgeries or significant neurological deficits. Primary efficacy endpoints include a 50% reduction in leg pain measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at three months, alongside a 40% improvement in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) or a score below 20% at six months. Safety will be evaluated through the incidence of major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher) within 90 days postoperatively and the reoperation rate after one year. Operational metrics like puncture time, fluoroscopy exposure, and assessments of healthcare provider well-being through burnout evaluations and procedural satisfaction surveys will also be analyzed. This pioneering randomized controlled trial seeks to establish UG-TELD as a viable, radiation-free alternative for LDH treatment, highlighting the need for advancements in surgical techniques to enhance safety and efficacy. Future multicenter studies are warranted to further validate these findings and optimize surgical protocols in spinal 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.