Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2617177143> ?p ?o ?g. }
- W2617177143 endingPage "1016" @default.
- W2617177143 startingPage "1008" @default.
- W2617177143 abstract "<h3>Background</h3> The reference surgical procedure for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation is open microdiscectomy. Minimal invasive discectomy with tubular retractors is hypothesised to cause less tissue damage and result in lower blood loss, less postoperative pain and faster recovery. We previously reported our 1 and 2-year results, and found no better outcomes of tubular discectomy compared with open microdiscectomy. Until now, no studies on tubular discectomy have reported results with more than 2 years of follow-up. Studies with long-term follow-up are required to determine if clinical outcomes are sustained and to assess specific long-term outcomes such as reoperation rate and iatrogenic low back pain due to impaired spinal integrity. The aim of this study is to evaluate the 5-year results of tubular discectomy compared with conventional microdiscectomy. <h3>Methods</h3> The study was designed as a double-blind randomised controlled trial. 325 patients with a symptomatic lumbar disc herniation were randomly allocated to tubular discectomy (166 patients) or conventional microdiscectomy (159 patients). Repeated standardised follow-up measurements were performed at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 26, 38, 52, 78, 104, 156, 208 and 260 weeks after randomisation. Main outcomes are the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for Sciatica (RDQ), Visual Analogue Scale for leg pain and low back pain, self-perceived recovery and reoperation incidence. <h3>Results</h3> There was no clinically significant difference between tubular discectomy and conventional microdiscectomy regarding the main clinical outcomes at any time point during the 5 years of follow-up. RDQ scores at 5 years were 4.3 (95% CI 3.3 to 5.2) in the tubular discectomy group and 3.4 (95% CI 2.4 to 4.5) in the conventional microdiscectomy group. The mean difference of 0.9 (95% CI −0.6 to 2.2) was not significant. Mean differences for leg pain and back pain were 0.2 (95% CI −5.5 to 6.0) and 0.4 (95% CI −5.9 to 6.7), respectively. 77% of patients allocated to conventional discectomy reported complete or near-complete recovery of symptoms compared with 74% of patients allocated to tubular discectomy (p=0.79). The reoperation rate was 18% in the tubular discectomy group and 13% in the conventional discectomy group (p=0.29). <h3>Conclusions</h3> Long-term functional and clinical outcome did not differ between patients allocated to tubular discectomy and conventional microdiscectomy. Primary and secondary outcome measures did not support the hypothesised advantages of tubular discectomy over conventional microdiscectomy. <h3>Trial registration number</h3> ISRCTN51857546." @default.
- W2617177143 created "2017-06-05" @default.
- W2617177143 creator A5018135109 @default.
- W2617177143 creator A5034037597 @default.
- W2617177143 creator A5058677948 @default.
- W2617177143 creator A5066343815 @default.
- W2617177143 creator A5078134258 @default.
- W2617177143 creator A5086752794 @default.
- W2617177143 creator A5088824710 @default.
- W2617177143 date "2017-05-26" @default.
- W2617177143 modified "2023-10-02" @default.
- W2617177143 title "Tubular discectomy versus conventional microdiscectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: long-term results of a randomised controlled trial" @default.
- W2617177143 cites W1227247476 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W1973195355 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W1976120715 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W1977843375 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W1986291883 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W1989154403 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W1996755039 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2008655410 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2013541878 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2038873861 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2045492448 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2053074042 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2057708922 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2058950159 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2059120492 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2070605678 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2078800869 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2079910875 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2114066939 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2114267081 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2117270070 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2119039593 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2127870064 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2141832642 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2145137370 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2163245468 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2309189560 @default.
- W2617177143 cites W2972379515 @default.
- W2617177143 doi "https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2016-315306" @default.
- W2617177143 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28550071" @default.
- W2617177143 hasPublicationYear "2017" @default.
- W2617177143 type Work @default.
- W2617177143 sameAs 2617177143 @default.
- W2617177143 citedByCount "44" @default.
- W2617177143 countsByYear W26171771432017 @default.
- W2617177143 countsByYear W26171771432018 @default.
- W2617177143 countsByYear W26171771432019 @default.
- W2617177143 countsByYear W26171771432020 @default.
- W2617177143 countsByYear W26171771432021 @default.
- W2617177143 countsByYear W26171771432022 @default.
- W2617177143 countsByYear W26171771432023 @default.
- W2617177143 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2617177143 hasAuthorship W2617177143A5018135109 @default.
- W2617177143 hasAuthorship W2617177143A5034037597 @default.
- W2617177143 hasAuthorship W2617177143A5058677948 @default.
- W2617177143 hasAuthorship W2617177143A5066343815 @default.
- W2617177143 hasAuthorship W2617177143A5078134258 @default.
- W2617177143 hasAuthorship W2617177143A5086752794 @default.
- W2617177143 hasAuthorship W2617177143A5088824710 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C14184104 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C2776008035 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C2776698514 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C2780907711 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C2992636618 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C44575665 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C141071460 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C14184104 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C142724271 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C168563851 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C204787440 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C2776008035 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C2776698514 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C2780907711 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C2992636618 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C42219234 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C44575665 @default.
- W2617177143 hasConceptScore W2617177143C71924100 @default.
- W2617177143 hasIssue "12" @default.
- W2617177143 hasLocation W26171771431 @default.
- W2617177143 hasLocation W26171771432 @default.
- W2617177143 hasOpenAccess W2617177143 @default.
- W2617177143 hasPrimaryLocation W26171771431 @default.
- W2617177143 hasRelatedWork W2133743333 @default.
- W2617177143 hasRelatedWork W2258098147 @default.
- W2617177143 hasRelatedWork W2351432934 @default.
- W2617177143 hasRelatedWork W2355125406 @default.
- W2617177143 hasRelatedWork W2530914810 @default.
- W2617177143 hasRelatedWork W2999740101 @default.
- W2617177143 hasRelatedWork W3006931297 @default.
- W2617177143 hasRelatedWork W3030765447 @default.