Discectomy Compared with Standardized Nonoperative Care for Chronic Sciatica Due to a Lumbar Disc Herniation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials evaluating acute sciatica have not demonstrated prolonged improvements in terms of patient-reported pain and function. For chronic sciatica, however, microdiscectomy has been found to be superior at 1 year. Whether this effect persists during the second year is not known. The purpose of the present study was to report the 2-year outcomes following lumbar microdiscectomy as compared with standardized nonoperative care for the treatment of chronic sciatica resulting from a lumbar disc herniation. METHODS: The present study is a secondary analysis of a previously reported randomized controlled trial with extension to 2 years of follow-up. Patients with radiculopathy for 4 to 12 months resulting from an L4-L5 or L5-S1 disc herniation were randomized to microdiscectomy or 6 months of nonoperative care followed by surgery if needed. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed at 2 years for the primary outcome (the intensity of leg pain) (range of possible scores, 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst pain]) as well as for secondary outcomes (including the Oswestry Disability Index score, the intensity of back pain, and quality of life). RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-eight patients were randomized in the present study. Twenty-four (38%) of the 64 patients who had been randomized to nonoperative care crossed over to surgical treatment by 2 years following enrollment. At the 2-year time point, the follow-up rate was approximately 70%. At 2 years, the operative group had less leg pain than the nonoperative group (mean, 2.8 ± 0.4 compared with 4.2 ± 0.4; treatment effect, 1.3 [95% confidence interval, 0.3 to 2.4]). The treatment effect favored surgery for all secondary outcome measures at 6 months and 1 year and for back pain intensity and physical function at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: At 2 years, the present study showed that microdiscectomy was superior to nonoperative care for the treatment of chronic sciatica resulting from an L4-L5 or L5-S1 disc herniation. However, the difference between the groups did not surpass the minimal clinically important difference at 2 years as was reached at earlier follow-up points, likely as the result of patients crossing over from nonoperative to operative treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".