ReviewGlobal spine journal2026
Impact of "Asymptomatic," Radiographic Foraminal Stenosis on Lumbar Spine Surgery Outcomes: A Systematic Review.
Review 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study DesignSystematic Review.ObjectivesLumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS) is a common finding on spine imaging. While surgery is indicated for symptomatic LFS, the clinical impact of incidentally found asymptomatic LFS (aLFS) on surgical outcomes remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate the influence of aLFS on reoperation rates and functional outcomes following lumbar spine surgery.MethodsA systematic search of PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library was conducted. Eight of 795 records met inclusion criteria and encompassed 1,744 adult patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery, of whom 468 (26.8%) had aLFS. Due to heterogeneity in LFS classification, surgical procedures, follow-up duration, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), quantitative pooling was not feasible and a structured narrative synthesis was performed. Study characteristics, patient demographics, surgical details, LFS classification methods, PROMs, and reoperation events were assessed.ResultsaLFS was associated in some studies with less postoperative improvement in Oswestry Disability Index and greater residual back and leg pain. Several studies suggested that preoperative aLFS at the surgical level was associated with increased index-level reoperations following decompression (low-moderate certainty). However, no association was found at adjacent levels or with fusion procedures.ConclusionsEvidence regarding the prognostic significance of incidental aLFS remains limited, heterogeneous, and low certainty. Association between index-level aLFS and later reoperation should be interpreted cautiously because instability-related factors may be stronger drivers of failure than stenosis severity alone. Current evidence does not support prophylactic treatment of radiographically asymptomatic foraminal stenosis, particularly at adjacent levels in the absence of instability or symptom correlation.
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.