ArticleCureus2026
Microendoscopic Posterior Decompression for L5-S1 Foraminal and Extraforaminal Lesions: A Comparative Study of Herniation Versus Stenosis.
Article in Cureus, 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
Introduction Foraminal and extraforaminal nerve root compression at the lumbosacral junction (L5/S1) is an underrecognized cause of lumbar radiculopathy. The L5 nerve root traverses a narrow space between the transverse process and the sacral ala and may be compressed by migrated disc fragments or fibro-osseous structures. Although lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and foraminal or extraforaminal stenosis (FES) at L5/S1 are often evaluated together, their mechanisms differ. This study aimed to compare postoperative clinical outcomes between patients with L5-S1 foraminal and extraforaminal disc herniation and those with stenosis who underwent microendoscopic posterior decompression. Materials and methods This retrospective observational study included consecutive patients who underwent microendoscopic posterior decompression for isolated L5/S1 foraminal or extraforaminal lesions between 2015 and 2019. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon. Patients were classified into the LDH or FES group based on preoperative MRI and CT findings, with final confirmation by intraoperative findings. Patients with previous lumbar surgery at the index level, radiographic instability or spondylolisthesis requiring fusion, and multilevel symptomatic lesions were excluded. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), with achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID; ≥13-point improvement) at 12 months as the primary endpoint. Leg and low back pain were assessed using the numeric rating scale (NRS). Results Forty patients completed 12-month follow-up (LDH, n = 19; FES, n = 21). ODI improvement was greater in the LDH group than in the FES group (median ΔODI, -24.4 (IQR, -36.0 to -10.9) vs. -17.8 (IQR, -22.2 to -2.2); p = 0.031). MCID achievement rates were comparable between the groups (73.7% in LDH and 61.9% in FES; p = 0.511). Improvements in leg pain and low back pain NRS did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.369 and p = 0.201, respectively). Conclusions Microendoscopic posterior decompression for L5/S1 foraminal or extraforaminal lesions resulted in similar rates of clinically meaningful improvement in LDH and FES. However, functional recovery was greater in LDH, suggesting that patients with FES may require different postoperative expectations regarding the degree and time course of functional recovery.
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.