Orthobiologic Supplementation Improves Clinical Outcomes Following Lumbar Decompression Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic-assisted lumbar decompression is a minimally invasive spine surgery which has been touted to reduce collateral tissue damage, incisional pain, recovery time and complications. Residual back or leg pain and recurrent herniation are commonly reported post-operative outcomes. It has been suggested that injecting orthobiologics like cryopreserved amniotic-derived products (ADPs) and bone marrow aspiration (BMA) into the surgery site would have additional benefit on patient outcomes. This is a Western Institutional Review Board (WIRB)-approved level 1, randomized controlled trial of prospectively collected patient demographic and outcomes data for endoscopic-assisted lumbar decompression surgery. The primary goal of this study was to compare patient outcomes of orthobiologic supplementation during endoscopic-assisted lumbar decompression surgery. METHODS: Following WIRB approval, 269 patients underwent lumbar endoscopic-assisted decompressive surgery between January 2011 and October 2017. Patients were randomized to receive ADP, BMA, both, or no supplementation (control group). Outcomes were measured by post-operative questionnaires (visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36)) over 12 months. RESULTS: Mean VAS-leg for either BMA or ADP group displayed statistically significant improvements at 2 weeks (3.55 vs. 4.77, P = 0.002), 6 months (2.34 vs. 3.37, P = 0.026), and 9 months (2.18 vs. 3.57, P = 0.01) compared to no supplementation group (control group). Similarly, improvements in mean VAS-back were significant at 2 weeks (3.98 vs. 5.01, P = 0.011), 2 months (3.22 vs. 3.93, P = 0.04), 9 months (2.38 vs. 4.11, P = 0.004), and 12 months (2.23 vs. 3.58, P = 0.011) compared to no supplementation group (control group). There were statistically significant differences in the ODI (2 weeks, 42.19 vs. 31.11, P = 0.014) and SF-36 (4 months, 85 vs. 63, P = 0.043 for ADP only), but these differences did not subsist over time. Two patients (one control, one ADP) re-herniated at the same level. CONCLUSIONS: Orthobiologic BMA and ADP resulted in improved pain control during early post-operative periods.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".