Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42622051›Full record

ArticleCureus2026

Revision Lumbar Spine Surgery for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Retrospective Study of Causes, Complications, and Outcomes.

Ahmed Al Atraqchi, Maher Nazar, Rawan Alatraqchi, Yasoob A Alaameri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ahmed Al AtraqchiNeurological Surgery, Dr. Saad Al-Witry Neuroscience Hospital, Baghdad, IRQ.
Maher NazarNeurological Surgery, Dr. Saad Al-Witry Neuroscience Hospital, Baghdad, IRQ.
Rawan AlatraqchiEmergency Medicine, Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust, Halifax, GBR.
Yasoob A AlaameriNeurological Surgery, Baghdad Medical City, Baghdad, IRQ.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFailed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) describes persistent, recurrent, or new-onset low back pain and/or radicular symptoms following lumbar spine surgery. Revision lumbar surgery remains challenging because of altered anatomy, epidural scarring, unclear tissue planes, and a higher risk of complications. Careful identification of a surgically correctable pathology is essential to improve outcomes.

aimThe aim of this study was to evaluate the causes of failed previous lumbar surgery, indications for revision surgery, operative procedures performed, postoperative complications, and clinical and functional outcomes in patients undergoing revision lumbar spine surgery for FBSS.

methodsThis retrospective observational study included 150 patients who underwent revision lumbar spine surgery for FBSS between October 2017 and September 2023, with follow-up completed until September 2025. Patients were included if they had persistent or recurrent symptoms after previous lumbar surgery with radiological evidence of a surgically correctable pathology. Clinical data, operative findings, radiological diagnoses, complications, and follow-up outcomes were reviewed. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) preoperatively and at three, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 29 (IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States), with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.

resultsThe study included 84 male and 66 female patients, with a mean age of 41 ± 10.09 years. The most common presenting symptom was sciatica, reported in 63 patients (42%), followed by low back pain with sciatica in 45 patients (30%). The most frequently revised level was L4/L5 in 48 patients (32%). Incomplete decompression was the most common cause of failed previous lumbar surgery, identified in 42 patients (28%), followed by recurrent disc herniation in 39 patients (26%), retained disc fragment in 36 patients (24%), pseudoarthrosis or instrumentation-related failure in 24 patients (16%), and wrong-level surgery in nine patients (6%). Perioperative complications occurred in 69 patients (46%), with dural tear being the most common complication in 24 patients (16%). At three months, 93 patients (62%) were pain-free, increasing to 105 patients (70%) at 12 months, and maintained at 24 months. Sensory improvement occurred in 15 of 48 patients (31%), while motor improvement occurred in 21 of 39 patients (53%). The mean VAS score improved from 7.22 ± 0.89 preoperatively to 0.98 ± 0.75 at 24 months, and the mean ODI improved from 66.30 ± 9.06 to 7.77 ± 3.55. Improvements in both VAS and ODI were statistically significant (p = 0.001).

conclusionThis study provides long-term evidence that revision lumbar surgery can achieve sustained improvements in pain and disability over 24 months in carefully selected patients with a surgically correctable pathology. It also demonstrates that potentially preventable technical factors, particularly incomplete decompression and retained disc fragments, represent important causes of failed previous surgery. These findings support the importance of accurate clinical-radiological correlation, careful patient selection, and meticulous surgical planning.

Indexed as

failed back surgery syndromeincomplete decompressionoswestry disability indexpseudoarthrosisrecurrent disc herniationrevision lumbar surgeryvisual analogue scale

Identifiers

PMID42622051
PMCPMC13489680

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.