ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Development and validation of a clinical predictive model for the risk of recurrence after unilateral biportal endoscopic diskectomy.
Article in Frontiers in 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To identify the independent risk factors for postoperative recurrence following unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) for lumbar disc herniation (LDH), and to develop and validate a recurrence risk prediction model. Objective: To analyze the risk factors contributing to postoperative recurrence in patients with LDH treated by UBED, and to construct and validate a predictive nomogram for recurrence risk after UBED. Methods: A total of 257 patients with single-level LDH who underwent UBED were retrospectively enrolled, among whom 24 presented postoperative recurrence, corresponding to a recurrence rate of 9.34%. The cohort was split into a training set ( Results: Twelve independent risk factors for postoperative recurrence were identified. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) reached 0.976 in the training set and 0.953 in the validation set. The P values of the H-L test were both >0.05 in the two datasets, indicating favorable model calibration. The model yielded significant clinical net benefit within threshold probabilities of 0-0.92 (training set) and 0-0.89 (validation set). Conclusions: The established nomogram incorporating 12 clinical and radiological variables exhibits satisfactory discrimination and calibration for predicting recurrence after UBED. It serves as a quantitative tool for rapid identification of patients at high recurrence risk in clinical practice. Nevertheless, limitations including single-center retrospective design, relatively small sample size, and an events-per-variable (EPV) ratio of approximately 2:1 (far below the recommended threshold) introduce potential overfitting and limited generalizability. This model is only applicable for preliminary screening of high-risk individuals and preoperative patient counseling, rather than acting as the sole basis for clinical decision-making. Multicenter, large-sample prospective cohort studies are warranted for further external validation and model refinement in the future.
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.