ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2026
Observational Cohort Study in Full Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy: Good Patient Outcomes Despite Learning Curve.
Article in International journal of spine 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic lumbar discectomy is less invasive than traditional microdiscectomy (MD); however, a learning curve is required for surgeons to acquire familiarity and efficiency. Our research question was as follows: how do patient outcomes after endoscopic lumbar disc surgery compare with outcomes after the current gold standard, MD, and does the surgeon's experience affect outcomes?
methodsWe describe a retrospective French cohort of adults with lumbar disc herniation who received endoscopic discectomy (ED; intralaminar or transforaminal) between February 2020 and May 2022 (ED series) and those who underwent open MD before February 2020 (MD series) in the same center. We reviewed perioperative data, clinical outcomes, and safety data and analyzed the ED learning curve with the Cumulative Sum method.
resultsThe ED series included 295 patients (151 transforaminal and 144 interlaminar procedures) and 214 in the MD series. Mean operative time was longer for ED (61.7 minutes) than for MD (51.1 minutes), but hospital stay was shorter (ED: 1.4 nights, MD: 2.5 nights). Lower back pain and leg pain measures significantly improved in both series. Nonsurgical complications and reoperations were less frequent after ED than after MD (4.1% vs 14.5% and 6.4% vs 8.9%, respectively). The cumulative sum analysis showed a learning curve for surgeons, with a reduction in operative time for both ED techniques as experience increased. Mean operative time was significantly longer for the transforaminal approach than for the interlaminar approach.
conclusionsClinical outcomes after ED are similar to those after MD, with some advantages for ED, including lower rates of complications and shorter hospital stays. Transforaminal ED requires a longer operative time than interlaminar, but operative time reduces with a learning curve for both techniques. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Endoscopic lumbar disc surgery should be considered as a feasible alternative to MD for lumbar disc herniation surgery that results in fewer complications and shorter hospital stays. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
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.