MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410607299 · doi:10.3389/fsurg.2025.1572977

Efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided compared to x-ray-guided percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy in China: a systematic review and pooled analysis

2025· review· en· W4410607299 on OpenAlex
Bin Zheng, Panfeng Yu, Yan Liang, Zhenqi Zhu, Haiying Liu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Surgery · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneousRadiologyLumbarUltrasoundSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) has become the preferred minimally invasive surgical treatment for lumbar disc herniation. This study aims to conduct a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided PELD compared to x-ray-guided PELD. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Ovid:MEDLINE, Embase, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases up to August 2024. Studies were included if they compared ultrasound- and x-ray-guided PELD in patients with lumbar disc herniation. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tools and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Results: Seven studies were included, for a total of 767 patients (383 who underwent ultrasound-guided PELD and 384 who underwent x-ray-guided PELD). Ultrasound guidance significantly reduced fluoroscopy shots, radiation dose, fluoroscopy time, and working channel establishment time compared to x-ray guidance. Ultrasound guidance also demonstrated higher one-time puncture success rates. No significant differences were found in overall operative time, complications, postoperative pain scores (visual analog scale), or long-term functional outcomes (oxygen desaturation index and satisfaction rates). Conclusions: Ultrasound-guided PELD significantly reduces radiation exposure and improves puncture efficiency compared to x-ray-guided techniques while maintaining equivalent clinical outcomes and complication rates. However, due to study limitations, including small sample sizes and geographical concentration of research, further multicenter randomized controlled trials are necessary to validate these findings across diverse populations and surgical settings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it