{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["16(1)"],"submitter":["Kartal A"],"pubmed_abstract":["Minimally invasive (MI) tubular decompression seeks to reduce soft‑tissue trauma compared with open laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). We performed a PRISMA‑compliant systematic review and meta‑analysis of comparative studies (2015-April 2025) identified in PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL. Adults with symptomatic degenerative LSS undergoing MI tubular decompression or open laminectomy were included. Evaluated outcomes included surgical parameters (e.g., overall complications; dural tears, surgical site infections, reoperation), perioperative and postoperative complications, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and hospital length of stay (LOS). Heterogeneity was measured using I<sup>2</sup>. Random-effects models were primary; PROMs were also analyzed in a common-effect sensit"],"journal":["Scientific reports"],"pagination":["176"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC12764488"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"pubmed_title":["Minimally invasive tubular decompression versus traditional open surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis."],"pmcid":["PMC12764488"],"pubmed_authors":["Hartl R","Hamad MK","Manalil NF","Wang E","Hussain I","Kartal A","Paracha S","Robayo A"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"Minimally invasive tubular decompression versus traditional open surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","description":"Minimally invasive (MI) tubular decompression seeks to reduce soft‑tissue trauma compared with open laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). We performed a PRISMA‑compliant systematic review and meta‑analysis of comparative studies (2015-April 2025) identified in PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL. Adults with symptomatic degenerative LSS undergoing MI tubular decompression or open laminectomy were included. Evaluated outcomes included surgical parameters (e.g., overall complications; dural tears, surgical site infections, reoperation), perioperative and postoperative complications, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and hospital length of stay (LOS). Heterogeneity was measured using I<sup>2</sup>. Random-effects models were primary; PROMs were also analyzed in a common-effect sensit","dates":{"release":"2025-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2025 Dec","modification":"2026-06-06T10:25:27.12Z","creation":"2026-05-29T03:11:24.658Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC12764488","cross_references":{"pubmed":["41354742"],"doi":["10.1038/s41598-025-28949-9"]}}