Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41984177›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026

Efficacy comparison of arthroscopic-assisted uniportal spinal surgery and percutaneous endoscopic discectomy for adjacent segment lumbar disc herniation after fusion surgery.

Tao Liu, Zhongzheng Zhi, Jian Kang, Jinhao Miao, Zhimin He, Desheng Wu, Shuqiang Wang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Tao LiuDepartment of Spine Surgery, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Zhongzheng ZhiDepartment of Spine Surgery, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Jian KangDepartment of Spine Surgery, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Jinhao MiaoDepartment of Spine Surgery, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Zhimin HeDepartment of Spine Surgery, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China. shsyspine@163.com.
Desheng WuDepartment of Spine Surgery, Shanghai East Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Shuqiang WangYueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.

Funding

Hongkou District Clinical Key Specialty of Shanghai HKLCZD2024B03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdjacent segment lumbar disc herniation (ASLDH), a recognized complication following lumbar fusion (LF) surgeries, can be managed with various techniques; however, evidences supporting the Arthroscopic-assisted Uniportal Spinal Surgery (AUSS) technique for ASLDH is currently lacking.

objectiveTo explore the application and validate the safety and efficacy of AUSS in the treatment of ASLDH.

methodsOne hundred and twelve patients diagnosed with ASLDH were enrolled from 2018 to 2024. Fifty-five patients underwent the AUSS technique, comprising the AUSS group, and fifty-seven patients received percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD), consisting the PELD group. Perioperative indicators, including 6-month postoperative efficacy rate, postoperative complications, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Short Form-36 Survey Scale (SF-36), were recorded and compared between the two groups at each follow-up time.

resultsCompared with PELD, AUSS demonstrated a shorter operation time and hospital stay, as well as less blood loss (P < 0.001). The overall efficacy rate in the AUSS group (98.2%) was higher than that in PELD group (86.0%, P < 0.05) at 6 months postoperatively, and the total incidence of postoperative complications in the AUSS group (3.6%) was lower than that in PELD group (28.1%, P < 0.001). At each follow-up time point, indicators of serum pain mediators, VAS-Back Pain (VAS-BP), VAS-Leg Pain (VAS-LP), JOA and ODI scores, and each dimension of SF-36 in the AUSS group were superior to those in PELD group (P < 0.001).

conclusionBoth the AUSS and PELD techniques represent effective minimally invasive strategies for the management of ASLDH following lumbar fusion. The AUSS approach achieved favorable functional recovery, a low incidence of procedure-related complications, and enhanced patient-reported quality of life in the present study. Findings of significant clinical advantages and promising translational potential of AUSS technique need further prospective studies with long-term follow-up.

Indexed as

Adjacent segment diseaseArthroscopic-assisted uniportal spinal surgeryLumbar disc herniationPercutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy

Identifiers

PMID41984177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.