Factors related to the postoperative recurrence of lumbar disc herniation treated by percutaneous transforaminal endoscopy: A meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To explore factors related to the postoperative recurrence of lumbar disc herniation treated by percutaneous transforaminal endoscopy. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang database and VIP database were systematically searched from the time of each library's construction to October 20, 2022. The studies that compared the influencing factors of recurrent lumbar disc herniation were included based on the PICO search structure. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of observational studies. The effects of the patient's age, gender, BMI, smoking, drinking, hypertension, diabetes, course of the disease, Pfirrmann grade, and the surgical segment on recurrent lumbar disc herniation were systematically evaluated using Revman 5.3. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Results: Thirteen studies involving 3,393 patients (323 patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation) treated with percutaneous transforaminal endoscopy were included in this study. The results of the systematic evaluation showed that the effects of gender, smoking, drinking, hypertension, type of lumbar disc herniation and the surgical segment on recurrent lumbar disc herniation were not statistically significant. However, age ≥60 years (OR = 2.23; 95% CI: 1.13, 4.41), BMI ≥25 (OR = 2.89; 95% CI: 1.23, 6.80), diabetes (OR = 1.73; 95% CI: 1.18, 2.55), course of disease ≥4 years (OR = 2.93; 95% CI: 1.58, 5.43), Pfirrmann grades 3-4 (OR = 3.10; 95% CI: 2.18, 4.40), incomplete removal of nucleus pulposus (OR = 3.26; 95% CI: 1.69, 6.27) and intraoperative fibre breakage (OR = 3.18; 95% CI: 1.56, 6.50) increased the risk of recurrence after treatment. Conclusion: The recurrence of lumbar disc herniation after percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic treatment is related to demographic characteristics, disease history and surgical conditions. In the future, more high-quality studies are needed to explore the influencing factors of recurrent lumbar disc herniation.
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 | 0.011 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.052 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".