ArticleAnnals of clinical epidemiology2025
Comparison of reoperation incidence after fusion versus decompression for lumbar degenerative disease: A propensity score-weighted study.
Article in Annals of clinical epidemiology, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReoperation after lumbar spine surgery is a major issue for both patients and physicians. It is uncertain whether fusion is superior to decompression alone for lumbar degenerative disease regarding reoperation rate. We aim to evaluate the reoperation rate after fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative disease compared with decompression alone.
methodsThis study was conducted under a retrospective cohort design in patients undergoing fusion or decompression alone in one or two levels for lumbar degenerative disease using a Japanese claims-based database. Primary outcome was reoperation incidence during the follow-up period, and secondary outcome was reoperation incidence within 90 days postoperatively. Confounding factors were handled using propensity score overlap weighting. Cumulative incidence of reoperation was calculated from the Kaplan-Meier curve and hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for reoperation were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models.
results8497 patients (2051 patients in the fusion group and 6446 in the decompression alone group) were included in the study. There was no difference in reoperation rate between fusion and decompression alone (weighted HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.69 to 1.04]; p = 0.11).
conclusionsAmong patients with lumbar degenerative disease who underwent fusion or decompression alone, no significant difference was observed between the two groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.