ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2026
Comparison of recurrence and postoperative outcomes after endoscopic versus microsurgical sequestrectomy for lumbar disc herniation: 5-year experience.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 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
Background: Endoscopic spinal surgery has expanded beyond standard lumbar procedures to include increasingly complex interventions. Nevertheless, limitations remain, particularly regarding recurrence after lumbar disc surgery. While percutaneous endoscopic and open microsurgical techniques are widely performed, evidence comparing recurrence rates and influencing factors between both approaches remains limited and controversial. This study aimed to compare recurrence rates, perioperative outcomes, and factors associated with recurrence between percutaneous endoscopic sequestrectomy (PES) and open microsurgical sequestrectomy (OMS) in patients undergoing surgery for lumbar disc herniation at follow-up. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of 187 consecutive patients treated for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) between September 2019 and November 2022 (PES: n=47; OMS: n=140). OMS was performed via laminotomy or hemilaminectomy; PES was performed via transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic sequestrectomy (TPES) or interlaminar percutaneous endoscopic sequestrectomy (IPES) access according to case-specific considerations. Recurrence was defined as a new ipsilateral LDH at the same level after initial postoperative relief; all recurrences requiring surgery were classified as recurrence requiring reoperation (RrR). Baseline clinical variables, operative time, intraoperative events, length of stay, complications, and recurrence-related reoperations were collected. Results: Patients in the PES group were younger [47.15±14.12 Conclusions: PES and OMS achieved high clinical improvement with comparable overall complication and recurrence rates at ≥2.5 years. PES was associated with significantly shorter operative time but a higher rate of neuropathic pain. Careful patient selection remains essential, and prospective studies with standardized patient-reported outcomes are warranted.
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.