ArticleGlobal spine journal2026
Defining Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation (RLDH): An International Survey Study.
Article in Global spine journal, 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
Study DesignInternational Expert Cross-Sectional Survey.ObjectivesTo establish international expert consensus on the definition, diagnostic criteria, imaging requirements, and surgical management of recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH).MethodsA comprehensive survey was developed based on current literature and disseminated globally via professional, academic, and personal networks among clinicians with expertise in spinal disorders. The survey covered core definitions, clinical symptoms, imaging criteria, and surgical preferences. Consensus was predefined as ≥70% agreement. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, Rasch analysis, and post-hoc analysis using adjusted standardized residuals with Bonferroni correction.ResultsA global cohort of 510 experts participated (62% neurosurgeons, 30% orthopedic surgeons), primarily from Europe (42%), North America (25%), and Asia (19%). Strong consensus was reached for defining RLDH as a new herniation at the same level (83.5%) and same side (72.4%) as the index surgery, following a pain-free interval (77.0%). No consensus was reached on interval duration. MRI confirmation was considered necessary (96.7%), with differentiation from postoperative scar tissue (87.0%). Open microdiscectomy remains the global gold standard (43%), with significant geographic (
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.