ReviewSpine deformity2026
Endoscopic and percutaneous minimally invasive repair of pars interarticularis defects: a systematic review of clinical outcomes.
Review in Spine deformity, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Response to Letter to the Editor for "Impact of Immunosuppression Type on 30-Day Postoperative Outcomes Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Retrospective National Cohort Study of 66,162 Patients".Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Tubular vs. Open Laminectomy for Pure Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Markov State-Transition Analysis.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Neuroimmune Phenotyping as the Next Frontier in Chronic Pain Medicine for Musculoskeletal Back Pain.Current pain and headache reports · 2026Review
- Ordinal Deep Learning for Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis Grading on Sagittal MRI.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Deep Learning-Based Multi-Class Pediatric Wrist Fracture Subtype Classification: A Pilot Study Comparing Convolutional Neural Network Architectures.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Response to: comment on 'digital twins and multimodal artificial intelligence in spine care: a scoping review of concepts, evidence, and translational barriers'.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- Response to: comment on 'digital twins and multimodal artificial intelligence in spine care: a scoping review of concepts, evidence, and translational barriers'.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- Response to: comment on 'digital twins and multimodal artificial intelligence in spine care: a scoping review of concepts, evidence, and translational barriers'.Spine deformity · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDirect pars interarticularis repair preserves motion and avoids adjacent segment degeneration associated with fusion. Endoscopic and percutaneous minimally invasive techniques aim to reduce tissue disruption and accelerate recovery, but their outcomes have not been systematically reviewed to evaluate pooled safety, efficacy, and clinical outcomes of these techniques.
methodsA systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, searching PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from inception through January 2026 using ("pars interarticularis" OR "spondylolysis") AND ("endoscopic" OR "percutaneous" OR "minimally invasive") AND ("repair" OR "fixation" OR "surgery"). English-language human studies reporting clinical outcomes were included. Extracted outcomes included radiographic data, pain and functional scores (VAS, ODI, SF-36), return to activity, complications, and reoperations.
resultsOf 140 identified studies, 5 met the inclusion criteria, comprising 47 patients (94 pars defects). Techniques included microendoscopic-assisted, irrigation endoscopic-assisted, tubular retractor-based, and fully percutaneous repair. Computed tomography-confirmed pars union was achieved in a pooled weighted mean of 84.4% (range, 77-100%) at 6-12 months. All studies reported significant pain and functional improvement, with a mean reduction in VAS of 5.5 points. Overall, 91.4% achieved good or excellent Macnab outcomes, and 93.6% returned to preinjury activity or sport. The complication rate was 6.4%, with no major neurologic, vascular, or infectious complications. Heterogeneity existed in surgical techniques and outcome reporting.
conclusionsEndoscopic and percutaneous minimally invasive direct pars repair is a safe, effective motion-preserving option for selected patients with symptomatic lumbar spondylolysis, though further prospective studies with standardized outcomes and longer follow-up are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42159996What 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.