ArticleJournal of pain research2026
Effectiveness, Safety, and Economic Evaluation of Ultrasound-Guided Acupotomy for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Compared with Conventional Physical Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol.
Article in Journal of pain research, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Acupotomy is an emerging minimally invasive option for patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) whose symptoms persist despite conventional conservative care; however, conventional blind procedures raise concerns about procedural safety and target localization. Ultrasound-guided acupotomy (UA) provides real-time visualization of lumbar anatomical structures and may improve procedural precision. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) protocol describes a study designed to compare UA with conventional physical therapy (CPT) in patients with LSS by assessing clinical effectiveness, safety, shear wave elastography (SWE)-assessed biomechanical changes, and cost-effectiveness. Patients and Methods: This prospective, single-center, assessor-blinded, superiority RCT will enroll 64 patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-confirmed degenerative LSS. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive either UA or CPT, consisting of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and microwave diathermy, twice weekly for 4 weeks. The primary outcome, upon which the sample size estimation is based, is the between-group difference in change from baseline in the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score at Week 5, after 1 week of treatment. Secondary outcomes include VAS scores at Weeks 8 and 12; functional and quality-of-life outcomes assessed using the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQol-5 Dimensions, and maximum walking distance; exploratory quantitative SWE-assessed multifidus muscle stiffness; and adverse events. Clinical effectiveness will be analyzed using analysis of covariance in the full analysis set. A within-trial cost-utility analysis will also be performed from the healthcare system perspective to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Conclusion: This protocol builds on a previous pilot study by incorporating assessor blinding, MRI-based diagnostic criteria, SWE-based biomechanical assessment, and cost-utility analysis. By integrating confirmatory clinical outcomes with safety, biomechanical, and economic outcomes, this trial is expected to generate evidence that may support clinical decision-making and inform future economic considerations for UA in the management of LSS.
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.