ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2026
Reoperation Rates Following Lumbar Decompression Surgery at Three or More Levels.
Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: In this retrospective study, we sought to investigate the reoperation rates of patients after multilevel (≥ 3) contiguous lumbar decompressions without concomitant fusion. Methods: We reviewed all spine surgeries performed over a 15-year period at a single Veterans Affairs hospital and identified patients who underwent multilevel lumbosacral (L4-S1) decompressions without fusion. Records were reviewed to confirm the surgery performed and determine if any subsequent spinal operations were performed. Patients with follow-up of less than 1 year were excluded. Results: Forty-five patients (44 M:1 F), with a mean age of 68 years, met minimum 1-year of follow-up (median 27 months) and were included in the final analysis. Three patients (7%) underwent subsequent fusion at a previously decompressed level at 14, 23, and 25 months. Another three (7%) underwent revision decompression at previously decompressed levels at 6, 24, and 130 months. Five patients (11%) underwent reoperation in the first 2 months for wound complications related to infection or hematoma. One patient (2%) underwent debridement of an epidural abscess located three levels cranial to the most proximal decompression 6 years after index surgery; this was determined to be unrelated to the prior decompression. In total, 12 patients (27%) underwent reoperation at time of final follow-up. Conclusions: The need for subsequent arthrodesis following decompressions of three or more consecutive levels without concomitant fusion may be less than intuitively suspected. Concomitant fusion at the time of index surgery is not necessarily warranted solely based on the number of levels decompressed.
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.