ArticleBrain & spine2026
Improvement in low back pain following endoscopic decompression for spinal stenosis.
Article in Brain & spine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Endoscopic decompression alone for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of paired change scores.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) commonly presents with neurogenic claudication and low back pain (LBP). Decompression surgery effectively relieves leg symptoms, but its impact on LBP remains inconsistent. While full-endoscopic decompression has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative, evidence regarding its specific effect on LBP is limited. Research question: To evaluate the improvement in LBP following full-endoscopic decompression for LSS with or without low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis (SPL), and to identify the clinical and radiological factors influencing these changes. Materials and methods: Consecutive patients undergoing full-endoscopic decompression for LSS between 2017 and 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Pre- and postoperative clinical and radiographic status were assessed for patients with a follow-up of ≥1 year. The primary outcome was reaching a minimally important clinical difference (MCID) in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for LBP. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with achieving MCID, and subgroup analysis assessed the impact of low-grade SPL on outcomes. Results: Sixty-four patients (mean age 63.8 years, 53.1% female) with mean follow-up of 24.9 months were included. 35.9% had low-grade SPL. MCID was achieved in 84.5% of patients at 12 months and 79.7% at last follow-up. Greater baseline back pain severity was associated with achieving MCID (OR = 2.31, 95% CI 1.31 - 4.08, p = 0.004), and low-grade SPL was not associated with inferior clinical outcomes. Discussion and conclusion: Full-endoscopic decompression for LSS is associated with clinically meaningful improvement in LBP in most patients, and the presence of low-grade SPL does not appear to negatively affect outcomes.
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.