Comparison of Surgical Invasiveness Between Microdiscectomy and 3 Different Endoscopic Discectomy Techniques for Lumbar Disc Herniation

Comparison of the effects of microdiscectomy and interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy on sexual activity

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes and sexual function of male and female patients who underwent IELD and MD due to LDH.

METHODS

The retrospective study included 72 sexually active patients aged 24-50 years. Patients were divided into four groups based on genders and surgical techniques. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) (leg pain/LBP) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) tests were performed. International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) to evaluate the sexual functions of male patients; Female sexual function tests (FSFI) were used to evaluate the sexual functions of female patients, and the Hospital Anxiety Depression Score (HADS) test was used to evaluate the hospital anxiety and depression levels of all patients.

RESULTS

Mean age of the patients 39.8 ± 5.6. In all patients, a statistically significant improvement in three parameters (VAS-Leg, VAS-LBP, ODI) was observed in the post-operative period. However of note, the MD group had a statistically higher post-operative VAS-LBP pain score when compared with the IELD group (p = 0.001; p < 0.01). Both surgical interventions proved effective in increasing IIEF-5 scores, with the IELD group having statistically higher scores in the postoperative period. However, there was no such difference in FSFI scores in female patients with either procedure.

CONCLUSION

The results showed that both IELD and MD improved sexual function in patients with LDH, but IELD had a greater positive effect in male patients compared to MD. It was also found that IELD caused less LBP and more improvement in anxiety levels compared to MD.

Clinical comparison of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar vs. unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective study

This study investigated the comparative effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) in managing lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Clinical data from 146 LDH patients treated surgically at the First Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (January 2020-January 2023) were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were categorized into UBED (n = 84) and PELD (n = 62) groups. Key metrics such as surgical time, incision length, fluoroscopy frequency, blood loss, hospital stay, complications, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were compared. The average age of patients in the UBED group was 53.46 ± 15.60 years, whereas the average age of patients in the PELD group was 55.61 ± 15.52 years (P = 0.411). Their BMI was 24.17 ± 2.94 and 23.90 ± 2.61, respectively (P = 0.558). The duration of symptoms was 10.52 ± 5.23 months in the UBED group and 11.66 ± 6.02 months in the PELD group (P = 0.225). The surgical time was 66.67 ± 15.83 min in the UBED group and 69.11 ± 25.84 min in the PELD group (P = 0.481). Intraoperative blood loss was 76.81 ± 26.74 ml in the UBED group and 69.44 ± 25.74 ml in the PELD group (P = 0.096). The hospital stay was 5.39 ± 1.83 days in the UBED group and 5.11 ± 3.42 days in the PELD group (P = 0.525). The average follow-up time was 16.46 ± 4.52 months in the UBED group and 15.71 ± 3.83 months in the PELD group (P = 0.289). Compared with those before the operation, the VAS score, JOA score, and ODI of both groups significantly improved on the first day postoperatively, at 3 months, and at 6 months. No significant intergroup differences were noted in terms of intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, or postoperative functional scores. Both groups showed marked postoperative improvements in functional outcomes. The postoperative satisfaction rates of patients in the UBED group and PELD group were 91.7% and 87.1%, respectively. Notably, the UBED group demonstrated a reduced fluoroscopy frequency and significantly lower rates of complications and recurrence. In terms of imaging, the disc Height of the two groups of patients showed a slight decrease after surgery, whereas the spinal canal area increased compared to before surgery, and there was no difference between the groups. UBED and PELD effectively alleviate LDH symptoms, but UBED has advantages in reducing fluoroscopy dependence, complications, and recurrence.

Comparison of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes Between Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Diskectomy and Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Diskectomy for the Treatment of L4/5-Level MSU Size-3 Lumbar Disk Herniation: A 2-Year Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal diskectomy (PETD) and unilateral biportal endoscopic diskectomy (UBED) have demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes in managing lumbar disk herniation (LDH). The surgical treatment of Michigan State University (MSU) Size-3 LDH remains technically challenging. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of PETD and UBED, specifically in the treatment of L4/5-level MSU Size-3 LDH.

METHODS

The study included 138 patients who underwent either PETD (75 cases) or UBED (63 cases). During a follow-up period of at least 2 years, clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), modified MacNab criteria, complication and recurrence rates, serum creatine phosphokinase (CPK) levels, and other surgical data. Radiographic parameters, including intraoperative bone loss, paraspinal muscle-disk ratio, and intervertebral height index, were also monitored.

RESULTS

Both VAS scores for low back and leg pain, as well as ODI scores, showed significant decreases in both groups postoperatively. At baseline, 3 months postoperation, and at the final follow-up, VAS and ODI scores showed no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups. Compared with the UBED group, the PETD group showed lower VAS scores for incision pain on the first day and third day after surgery ( P < .001). Although no significant differences were observed in modified MacNab criteria, complication rates, or LDH recurrence, PETD demonstrated advantages in operative time, incision length, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative length of stay, total hospitalization costs, serum CPK levels, and intraoperative bone loss volume ( P < .001). No statistically significant differences were observed in the intervertebral height index or paraspinal muscle-disk ratio.

CONCLUSION

Both PETD and UBED can achieve favorable clinical outcomes in the treatment of L4/5-level MSU Size-3 LDH. Compared with UBED, PETD performed under local anesthesia offers superior short-term postoperative incision pain relief, improved perioperative quality of life, and reduced surgical invasiveness.

Comparing the efficacy and safety of biportal endoscopic discectomy with microscopic discectomy for lumbar herniated intervertebral disc: a multicentre, prospective, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of biportal endoscopic discectomy (BED) with microdiscectomy (MD) in patients with a single-level lumbar disc herniation, and to determine whether BED gives similar clinical outcomes to MD but with potential additional benefits.

Methods

Included in this multicentre, prospective, assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial were patients with a single-level lumbar disc herniation requiring surgical intervention. These were recruited from six hospitals between 13 July 2021 and 16 September 2022, and followed up for 12 months. The interventions were either BED (n = 50) or MD (n = 50). The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 12 months postoperatively.

Results

In total, 100 patients were randomized into the BED and MD groups based on computer-generated allocation. The analysis included 41 and 46 patients from the MD and BED groups, respectively. At 12 months, the mean ODI scores were comparable between the BED (10.92; SD 12.93) and MD (10.32; SD 12.55) groups (mean difference 0.61 (95% CI -4.47 to 5.68); p = 0.816). No serious adverse event was seen in either group. Compared to the MD group, the BED group showed slightly lower surgical site pain at 24 (p = 0.004) and 48 hours postoperatively (p = 0.014), lower serum creatine phosphokinase (CPK) (p = 0.003), better scar quality at three (p = 0.002) and six months (p = 0.007), and a significantly lower rate of wound dehiscence (p = 0.018).

Conclusion

BED is as effective as MD in treating single-level lumbar disc herniation but has distinct advantages in terms of postoperative wound complications. Additionally, BED may offer potential benefits in terms of early postoperative surgical site pain, scar aesthetics, and muscle preservation as indicated by CPK levels. These findings suggest that BED is a safe and effective alternative to MD, offering the benefits of minimal invasiveness while maintaining clinical efficacy.

Uniportal Versus Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Updated Meta-Analysis

Study DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.ObjectiveAlthough uniportal and biportal endoscopic decompression have emerged as promising minimally invasive options for the management of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), their relative advantages remain debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of both approaches in LSS treatment.MethodsIn adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of science for randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing the outcomes of uniportal and biportal endoscopic techniques for LSS treatment. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.ResultsA total of 11 studies were included, comprising 1199 patients. Biportal endoscopy was associated with a significantly lower operation time (P < .01), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 12 months (P < .01), and higher postoperative dural sac area (P < .01) and dural sac area expansion (P = .02). There were no significant differences between groups in intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization time, back pain, leg pain, or ODI at other timepoints, ipsilateral facetectomy angle, and overall complications, including dural tear, infection, postoperative hematoma, lower limb numbness, and nerve root injury.ConclusionIn this meta-analysis, biportal endoscopic decompression demonstrated significantly lower operation time, ODI at 12 months, and higher postoperative dural sac area and dural sac area expansion, although both techniques showed similar safety profiles and complication rates. Further high-quality studies are needed to better assess the advantages of both techniques for LSS treatment.

Effectiveness and Safety of Transforaminal Spinal Endoscopy: Analysis of 1000 Clinical Cases

Background: Transforaminal spinal endoscopy is a minimally invasive technique used to treat several spinal conditions. Thanks to its minimally invasive approach, it offers numerous advantages over traditional open surgery, including reduced blood loss, faster post-operative hospital discharge, quicker recovery, and lower complications. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transforaminal spinal endoscopy on a large cohort of patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 1000 patients who underwent transforaminal spinal endoscopy between January 2015 and December 2023. All patients were treated by a single surgeon in a single hospital. The patients presented with persistent symptoms of radicular pain, neurological deficits related to herniated discs, and foraminal stenosis. All patients underwent transforaminal spinal endoscopy using a transforaminal approach. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) for pain, the ODI (Oswestry Disability Index) for functional disability, and patient satisfaction. Perioperative complications were recorded and analyzed. Results: Reduction in Pain: The mean VAS score decreased significantly from 8.2 ± 1.3 pre-operatively to 2.1 ± 1.5 at 12 months post-operatively (p < 0.001). Functional Improvement: The mean ODI improved from 56% ± 12% pre-operatively to 18% ± 9% at 12 months post-operatively (p < 0.001) Patient Satisfaction: 92% of patients reported a high level of satisfaction with their treatment results. Complications: Perioperative complications were minimal, with an overall common complication rate of 4%. No major complications or functional impairments were observed. Conclusions: Transforaminal spinal endoscopy is associated with good clinical outcomes and a low complication rate in patients with spinal pathologies. This study supports the adoption of this technique as a first-line treatment for selected patients, offering a less invasive and equally effective option compared to traditional surgery.

A retrospective study on the efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy treating lumbar disc herniation and concomitant grade I stable degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) in treating patients with single-level lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and concomitant grade I stable degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).

METHODS

We reviewed patients diagnosed with single-level LDH and concomitant grade I stable DLS who underwent UBED from June 2021 to June 2023. Preoperative and postoperative slippage percentage, disc height (DH), visual analogue scale (VAS) for back pain and leg radiation pain, and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were compared by a paired-sample test. Demographics and postoperative slip progression were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 32 patients with a mean age of 72.16 ± 8.07 years were enrolled. 27 underwent L4/5 UBED, 4 underwent L5/S1 UBED, and 1 underwent L3/4 UBED. The postoperative mean vertebral slip percentage increased significantly and the mean DH at the surgical level decreased significantly at the last follow-up. VAS scores for back and leg pain reduced significantly after surgery, and ODI scores improved significantly postoperatively. Only one patient suffered postoperative slip progression. Two cases of postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leakage were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of UBED to treat LDH and concomitant grade I stable DLS demonstrated effective pain relief and improved quality of life for patients, with a low incidence of postoperative slip progression. UBED is a safe and effective surgical technique for treating older patients with LDH and concomitant grade I stable DLS.

Symptomatic extraforaminal gas-containing pseudocyst treated with unilateral biportal endoscopic spinal surgery: a case report and literature review

Background

Gas-containing pseudocyst is an uncommon cause of lumbar radiculopathy and most lumbar gas-containing pseudocysts locate in the spinal canal. While, extraforaminal gas-containing pseudocysts are very rare. Here, we reported a case of extraforaminal gas-containing pseudocyst, which compressed L4 exiting nerve root and caused lumbar radiculopathy.

Case presentation

A 62-year-old female presented with low back pain and radiation to anteromedial aspect of right thigh and anterior aspect of right calf. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of lumbar spine showed a gas-containing pseudocyst compressing in L4 exiting nerve root right extraforaminal area at L4-5 level. L4 exiting nerve root blocking was performed to confirm the responsible level. Then we performed BESS through a paraspinal approach to remove the gas-containing pseudocyst and release L4 exiting nerve root. Postoperatively, the patient achieved a good outcome and the pain was relieved.

Conclusions

Lumbar gas-containing pseudocyst in extraforaminal area is rare and can cause lumbar radiculopathy. Paraspinal approach BESS is an alternative method to treat extraforaminal gas-containing pseudocyst and can provide good outcome.

Full-endoscopic lumbar spine discectomy: Are We Finally There? A Meta-Analysis of Its Effectiveness Against Non-microscopic Discectomy, Microdiscectomy and Tubular Discectomy

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy (FELD) has gained increasing attention as a minimally invasive alternative to conventional microdiscectomy (MD), tubular discectomy (MED), and open non-microscopic discectomy (OD) Despite significant technological advancements in endoscopic techniques over the past decade, it is not yet clear whether FELD offers a definitive advantage over traditional methods.

PURPOSE

This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of available publications to assess whether the superiority of endoscopic treatment over traditional open and minimally invasive endoscopic surgical techniques can be more conclusively established. The central question driving this meta-analysis was: Are we finally there?

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Meta-analysis study included adult patients (≥18 years old) with symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH) without concurrent lumbar spinal stenosis METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for randomized or nonrandomized controlled trials published between 2013 and 2024. The quality of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively. Included studies reported on at least one of the following outcomes: (1) adverse effects, (2) operative parameters, (3) bed and hospital stay, and (4) clinical indices (postoperative values). Mean differences (MDs) or odds ratios (ORs) were used to compare treatment effects between FELD and MD, MED, or OD.

RESULTS

FELD demonstrated several advantages, particularly in short-term pain (within 6 months postoperatively) relief and faster patient (length of bed stay 1-2 days) mobilization, while maintaining comparable risks of recurrence, reoperation, and complications relative to traditional techniques. However, there is substantial heterogeneity in the data and a limited number of prospective trials.

CONCLUSIONS

More well-designed, prospective randomized trials are necessary, with a focus on radiological outcomes and comprehensive cost analyses including societal costs. Only through such robust data can we determine whether FELD truly represents a new gold standard for lumbar discectomy. Are we finally there? We are certainly closer, but much remains to be addressed.

Multifidus fat infiltration negatively influences the postoperative outcomes in lumbar disc herniation following transforaminal approach percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy

PURPOSE

This study aims to investigate the influence of multifidus muscle fat infiltration on clinical outcomes in lumbar disc herniation (LDH) undergoing percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 224 patients who underwent lateral PELD, with complete one-year follow-up data. Patients were divided into two groups based on preoperative MRI evaluation of L4 multifidus muscle fat infiltration: a mild group (< 25%) and a severe group (≥ 25%). Baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

At the final follow-up, significant improvements in VAS scores for back and leg pain, ODI scores, and EQ-5D scores were observed in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative VAS scores for back and leg pain, ODI scores, and EQ-5D scores between the two groups. However, significant differences were found in VAS scores for back pain, ODI scores, and EQ-5D scores at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively (P < 0.05), while no significant difference was noted in VAS scores for leg pain during follow-up. The total recurrence rate was 6.7% (15 out of 224 cases), with 12 cases in the severe group and 3 cases in the mild group, showing a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of postoperative PELD in patients with LDH is impacted by severe multifidus muscle fat infiltration. Multifidus muscle fat infiltration represents a risk factor for recurrent LDH after PELD.

Percutaneous paravertebral endoscopic decompression for the treatment of far-out syndrome involving the L5 nerve root: technical report and preliminary results

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe the technique of percutaneous paravertebral endoscopic decompression for the treatment of far-out syndrome and to analyze the early clinical results of this technique.

METHODS

From April 2021 to June 2023, a retrospective study was conducted on patients with far-out syndrome who underwent percutaneous paravertebral endoscopic decompression at Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria were utilized for the assessment of leg pain, quality of life, and clinical efficacy, respectively. Clinical outcomes were assessed at the day before surgery, 1 day, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months after surgery, and the last follow-up. Meanwhile, the incidence rate of foraminal stenosis, surgery time, and complications were recorded for comprehensive evaluation.

RESULTS

This study included a cohort of 16 patients, with a mean age at the time of surgery of 70.94 ± 4.04 years. The average duration of symptoms was 10.81 ± 5.13 months, while the mean follow-up period lasted for 16.69 ± 5.84 months. The results revealed significant improvements in VAS scores and ODI scores at each time point following the operation (P < 0.05). According to the modified MacNab criteria, excellent or good outcomes were observed in 15 cases (93.70%). Four patients presented with postoperative numbness, which was effectively alleviated through conservative treatment. One case with a fair outcome exhibited residual radicular symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The current technical report presents a successful treatment strategy for far-out syndrome, demonstrating promising preliminary efficacy and safety.

Clinical Efficacy of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy with Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression

Unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) with unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) is an essential neurosurgical procedure for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. This technique offers significant advantages over traditional full laminectomy and spinal fusion fixation, providing surgeons with greater operational freedom and precision in decompression. The UBE-ULBD procedure stands out because of its distinct working and observation channels, which significantly augment the surgeon's maneuverability. The process begins by marking two 1-cm incisions, approximately 1 cm away from the midpoint of the cranial and caudal extents at the target intervertebral space, using the intersection of the surgical side's laminar gap with the puncture needle as a central reference. This methodical approach ensures that the bilateral channels are interconnected at the laminar gap. After this, meticulous dissection of the soft tissues encircling the laminar gaps for both channels is performed using specialized separation instruments, guaranteeing a clear passage between the observation and working channels. The endoscope is then meticulously positioned within the left observation channel, integrating it with a light source, high-definition imaging system, and an irrigation line for optimal visualization. On the right side, the working channel is adeptly used with a nucleotome and radiofrequency ablation electrode to meticulously remove soft tissues. This step is crucial for exposing the superior edge of the inferior lamina, the laminar gap itself, and the inferior edge of the superior lamina, thereby achieving effective bilateral decompression (Figure 1).Characterized by minimal incisions and rapid postoperative recovery, UBE-ULBD achieves favorable clinical outcomes.1-3 In Video 1, we present an endoscopic operation of single-segment lumbar decompression via the posterior approach using UBE-ULBD. Additionally, we conducted a retrospective study of 25 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with UBE-ULBD to evaluate the practicality of this technique (Table 1). The mean (standard deviation) operative time for the UBE-ULBD group was 58.44 (6.60), with significant improvements in Oswestry Disability Index and visual analog scale scores at 12 months postoperatively (from 54.21 [5.27] to 10.17 [2.73], and from 5.00 [1.06] to 1.67 [1.65], respectively, P < 0.05). Microdiscectomy ULBD, unilateral uniportal endoscopic with ULBD, and UBE-ULBD are the 3 main surgical approaches for treating bilateral symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis. Choi et al. 1 suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in postoperative visual analog scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores among the 3 techniques. However, microdiscectomy ULBD is associated with more pronounced trauma, including denervation pain of muscles. The percutaneous endoscopic ULBD offers shorter operative times and less muscle trauma and blood loss, which may have a multifaceted positive impact on postoperative recovery and symptom alleviation for patients.

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy versus Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation Linked with Posterior Ring Apophysis Separation: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVES

Posterior ring apophysis separation (PRAS) associated with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a relatively rare form of disc herniation. This study aims to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) in the treatment of PRAS with LDH.

METHODS

We enrolled 41 patients who met the inclusion criteria to undergo either UBE (15 cases) or PELD (26 cases) between October 2022 and October 2023. Perioperative evaluation parameters included mean operative time, hemoglobin (Hb) loss, length of stay (LOS), and postoperative complications. Outcomes were assessed at admission, as well as at 1, 3, and 6 months postsurgery using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Additionally, we evaluated the results according to the modified MacNab criteria.

RESULTS

Both groups demonstrated improvements in postoperative VAS and ODI scores. However, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in VAS and ODI scores before surgery, or at 1, 3, and 6 months postsurgery. Additionally, no notable differences were observed in the modified MacNab criteria. The UBE group experienced greater Hb loss, longer mean operative time, and increased LOS compared to the PELD group. Furthermore, 2 patients in the PELD group reported recurrence, while one patient in the UBE group experienced a dural tear.

CONCLUSIONS

UBE and PELD possess strong clinical effectiveness for treating PRAS with LDH. Although the UBE group had a longer mean operative time and LOS, with more Hb loss, the UBE group had a lower recurrence rate. Therefore, UBE remains safe and innovative for the treatment of PRAS with LDH.

Full Endoscopic Transpedicular Discectomy for a Rostrally Migrated L5-S1 Disc Herniation in the Setting of Previous Lumbar Surgery: A Case Report With Intraoperative Video

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE

The surgical management of rostral disc herniations at L5-S1 poses challenges for conventional endoscopic approaches, particularly in patients who have had previous lumbar surgery. We present a full endoscopic transpedicular discectomy (FETD), whereby a pediculotomy is created to pass an endoscope through the pedicle for intracanal access. This addresses anatomic obstacles and potential complications associated with other endoscopic and minimally invasive or open techniques. To date, this is the only article to highlight this approach with a case report and intraoperative video.

CLINICAL PRESENTATION

A 76-year-old man with a history of L3-S1 laminectomy presented with left leg pain and a near-complete left foot drop. An MRI revealed a left paracentral rostrally migrated disc herniation arising from L5-S1 with impingement of the exiting left L5 nerve root at the inferomedial aspect of the pedicle of L5. The patient consented to the FETD procedure. Using sequential reamers of increasing diameter and a high-speed burr, a superolateral to inferomedial pediculotomy was performed. This approach allowed us to target the pathology at the point of maximum compression without traversing the prior operative field. A transforaminal endoscopic approach was not possible with the iliac crest obstructing rostral angulation. The disc was successfully removed without any intraoperative complications, and after surgery, the patient's radiculopathy resolved without any radiographic evidence of instability.

CONCLUSION

FETD is a unique approach that demonstrates the versatility of endoscopic spine surgery, offering advantages over conventional approaches particularly for rostral disc herniations at L5-S1 in the setting of prior lumbar surgery.

Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Interbody Fusion: Comparing Primary Versus Revision Cases

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (BELIF) has been supported by many articles. Advantages include earlier rehabilitation and equal or superior fusion rates compared with other lumbar interbody fusion techniques.

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of primary and revision biportal endoscopic interbody fusion.

METHODS

Seventy-two consecutive patients who underwent primary and revision BELIF and had at least 2-year follow-up were investigated. Clinical outcomes, including Oswestry Disability Index, the visual analog system (VAS), MacNab's criteria, surgical time, and length of hospital stay, were recorded. Radiological outcome was assessed by CT and graded according to Bridwell system.

RESULTS

No notable difference was found in preoperative baselines between the groups. Both groups demonstrated similar clinical improvement in VAS, Oswestry Disability Index, and MacNab criteria. Durotomies were more common in the revision setting (4/33 vs. 0/39 in primary), and surgical time was statistically longer (121.4 ± 21.5 minutes primary versus 179 ± 23.7 minutes revision; P < 0.001). However, no difference was observed in fusion rates at all times points graded by CT scan (94.87% vs. 93.93% primary versus revision at the final follow-up, P = 0.51).

CONCLUSION

Revision BELIF demonstrate similar clinical and radiographic outcomes compared with primary BELIF, yet surgical time and durotomy risks are increased.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

Comparison of surgical invasiveness and hidden blood loss between unilateral double portal endoscopic lumbar disc extraction and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis

BACKGROUND

Hidden blood loss (HBL) is a notable complication in spinal endoscopic procedures. This study aims to compare tissue damage and hidden blood loss between two minimally invasive spinal techniques: unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (UBE) and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID). Furthermore, the study examines the risk factors contributing to hidden blood loss in each procedure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted on 86 patients who underwent unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (UBE) and 73 patients who received percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) between January 2021 and December 2023.Demographic data, blood loss parameters, and serum levels of creatine kinase (CK) and C-reactive protein (CRP) were recorded. Pearson or Spearman correlation analyses were conducted to evaluate associations between patient characteristics and HBL. Additionally, multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for HBL.

RESULTS

A total of 159 consecutive patients were included in this study, consisting of 83 females and 76 males. The average hidden blood loss (HBL) was 431.00 ± 160.52 ml in the UBE group and 328.40 ± 87.71 ml in the PEID group, showing a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). Pearson or Spearman correlation analysis indicated that in the UBE group, HBL was associated with operation time, preoperative hematocrit (Hct), ASA classification, and paraspinal muscle thickness. In the PEID group, HBL was correlated with operation time, preoperative activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), paraspinal muscle thickness, and the presence of diabetes (P < 0.05). Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated a positive correlation between HBL and operation time in both groups (P < 0.05), identifying operation time as an independent risk factor for HBL. Furthermore, CRP and CK levels were generally lower in the PEID group compared to the UBE group, particularly on postoperative day 3 for CRP and postoperative day 1 for CK. Both total blood loss and hidden blood loss were significantly lower in the PEID group than in the UBE group.

CONCLUSION

Compared to UBE, PEID shows superior results regarding surgical trauma, total blood loss, hidden blood loss (HBL), and postoperative hematocrit (Hct) reduction. Consequently, PEID is recommended as the treatment of choice for younger patients or those with compromised baseline perioperative conditions.Additionally, Hidden blood loss remains a critical factor, and surgical duration presents a shared risk in both procedures.

Comparison of clinical outcomes and cost-utility between unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective matched controlled study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and cost-utility of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) versus percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) for the treatment of single-level lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 99 patients who underwent either UBE (n = 33) or PEID (n = 66) between July 2022 and December 2023 at the Second Xiangya Hospital. Patients were matched 1:2 based on age, sex, and surgery level to ensure comparability. Clinical outcomes were assessed using Visual Analog Scale (VAS), European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) calculated for cost-utility analysis. Hospitalization costs were analyzed, and the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICER) was determined.

RESULTS

Both UBE and PEID groups demonstrated significant postoperative improvements in VAS, EQ-5D, and ODI scores (p < 0.05). The operative time, blood loss and nursing cost were significantly higher for UBE compared to PEID (p < 0.05). UBE has higher gained QALY and overall costs, but the differences are not statistically significant (p = 0.643 for QALY, p = 0.327 for costs). The Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) for UBE compared to PEID was calculated to be $354.5 per QALY gained, indicating that for each additional QALY gained through UBE, an additional cost of $354.5 is incurred compared to PEID.

CONCLUSION

In our single-center study conducted in China, both the UBE and PEID procedures have demonstrated comparable short-term efficacy in alleviating pain and improving functional ability in patients with single-level LDH. UBE procedure demonstrates greater cost-utility than the PEID procedure in cost-utility analysis, despite its longer operative time, higher nursing costs and greater blood loss.

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression with Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression (UBED) offers the advantages of minimal tissue damage, operational flexibility, and clear visualization, positioning it as an innovative and minimally invasive endoscopic technique. Nevertheless, the clinical evidence supporting the use of UBED in the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases is limited and conflicting.

METHODS

As of October 1, 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted across databases including Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify all published studies on minimally invasive UBED for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases. Data pertaining to patient demographics, fluoroscopy time, operative duration, intraoperative hemorrhage, hospitalization length, visual analog scale (VAS) score for back and leg pain, MacNab criteria, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and complication rates were extracted. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was utilized to assess the quality.

RESULTS

Twelve articles were included, involving 816 patients. The back VAS score (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.09-0.07, P = 0.75), MacNab criteria (95% CI: 0.52-2.3, P = 0.82), fluoroscopy time (95% CI: -7.03 to -0.4, P = 0.08), and the incidence of complications (95% CI: 0.5-1.73, P = 0.82) were not significantly different, while the leg VAS score (95% CI: 0.01-0.18, P = 0.03), ODI score (95% CI: -1.03 to -0.09, P = 0.02), operation time (95% CI: 5.76-20.62, P = 0.0005), hospitalization length (95% CI: 0.41-2.76, P = 0.008), and intraoperative hemorrhage (95% CI: 21.92-72.44, P = 0.0003) were significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

UBED offers superiority in ODI, flexibility, and visual field clarity. Conversely, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression presents advantages in terms of operation duration, blood loss, hospitalization length, and leg VAS score. These factors should be thoroughly considered when selecting a surgical approach.

Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy versus microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) with microdiscectomy (MD) for treating lumbar disk herniation (LDH).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Web of Science databases from database inception to April 2023 to identify studies comparing UBED and MD for treating LDH. This study evaluated the visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), Macnab scores, operation time, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, and complications, estimated blood loss, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and Macnab scores at various pre- and post-surgery stages. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 9 distinct studies with a total of 1001 patients. The VAS scores for low back pain showed no significant differences between the groups at postoperative 1-3 months (P = 0.09) and final follow-up (P = 0.13); however, the UBED group had lower VAS scores at postoperative 1-3 days (P = 0.02). There were no significant differences in leg pain VAS scores at baseline (P = 0.05), postoperative 1-3 days (P = 0.24), postoperative 1-3 months (P = 0.78), or at the final follow-up (P = 0.43). ODI comparisons revealed no significant differences preoperatively (P = 0.83), at postoperative 1 week (P = 0.47), or postoperative 1-3 months (P = 0.13), and the UBED group demonstrated better ODI at the final follow-up (P = 0.03). The UBED group also exhibited a shorter mean operative time (P = 0.03), significantly shorter hospital stay (P < 0.00001), and less estimated blood loss (P = 0.0002). Complications and modified MacNab scores showed no significant differences between the groups (P = 0.56 and P = 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The evidence revealed no significant differences in efficacy between UBED and MD for LDH treatment. However, UBED may offer potential benefits such as shorter hospital stays, lower estimated blood loss, and comparable complication rates.

Unilateral biportal endoscopy via two different approaches for upper lumbar disc herniation: a technical note

BACKGROUND

The traditional surgical procedures for upper lumbar disc herniation (ULDH) usually lead to frequent complications. We aim to investigate the clinical efficacy of the unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) technique in treating upper lumbar disc herniation (ULDH).

METHODS

From January 2020 to December 2021, the clinical data of 28 patients with ULDH treated with the UBE technique were collected and analyzed for surgery time under UBE, postsurgical drainage, postsurgical hospital stay, and complications. The clinical efficacy was evaluated according to the modified MacNab score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and visual analogue scale (VAS) of low back pain and lower limb pain before the surgery; one week, one month, and three months after the surgery; and at the last follow-up.

RESULTS

All patients underwent the UBE surgery successfully. The surgery time under UBE for non-fusion cases was 47.50 ± 11.84 min (monosegment) and 75.00 ± 20.66 min (two segments), while that for fusion cases was 77.50 ± 21.02 min. The postsurgical drainage for non-fusion cases was 25.00 ± 13.94 mL (monosegment) and 38.00 ± 11.83 mL (two segments), while that for fusion cases was 71.25 ± 31.72 mL. The postsurgical hospital stay was 8.28 ± 4.22 days. The follow-up time was 15.82 ± 4.54 months. The VAS score for each time period after the surgery was significantly lower (P < 0.05), while the ODI was significantly higher than that before the surgery (P < 0.05). According to the modified MacNab scoring standard, the ratio of excellent to good was 96.43% at the last follow-up. Two patients experienced transient numbness and pain in their lower limbs and no activity disorder after the surgery, and they recovered after conservative treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical effect of UBE technique in treating ULDH was reliable. According to the needs of the disease, the interlaminar approach or paraspinal approach of the UBE technique was selected. This technique took into account the effect of treatment, achieved the purpose of minimal invasiveness, and did not require special instruments. Therefore, it has the potential for clinical application.

Early Clinical and Radiologic Evaluation of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy and Bilateral Decompression in Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

 The aim of this study is to evaluate the changes in radiologic parameters and clinical outcomes following unilateral biportal endoscopic unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression (UBE ULBD) for treatment of central lumbar spinal stenosis.

METHODS

 Forty-one central lumbar spinal stenosis patients who underwent UBE ULBD were enrolled from April 2021 to February 2023. Visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and the modified MacNab criteria were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively. The preoperative and postoperative cross-sectional area of the spinal canal (CSAC), anteroposterior diameter, horizontal width, and ipsilateral and contralateral lateral recess height were calculated from axial computed tomography (CT) scans. Percentage of facet joint preservation measured on axial CT scans was obtained preoperation and postoperation.

RESULTS

 The VAS for back and leg pain improved from 7.24 ± 0.80 and 7.59 ± 0.59 preoperatively to 2.41 ± 0.55 and 2.37 ± 0.62 (p < 0.05) postoperatively and 1.37 ± 0.54 and 1.51 ± 0.55 at the last follow-up (p < 0.05). For ODI, improvement from 60.37 ± 4.44 preoperatively to 18.90 ± 4.66 (p < 0.05) at the last follow-up was observed. CT scans demonstrated that the postoperative CSAC increased significantly from 287.84 ± 87.81 to 232.97 ± 88.42 mm (p < 0.05). The mean postoperative anteroposterior diameter and horizontal width increased significantly from 18.01 ± 3.13 and 19.57 ± 3.80 to 22.19 ± 4.56 and 21.04 ± 3.72 mm, respectively (p < 0.05). The ipsilateral lateral recess height and contralateral lateral recess height were 3.39 ± 1.12 and 3.20 ± 1.14 mm preoperatively and 4.03 ± 1.37 and 3.83 ± 1.32 mm (p < 0.05) postoperatively, with significant differences. The ipsilateral and contralateral facet joint preservations were 88.17 and 93.18%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

 The UBE ULBD surgery is a safe and effective treatment for central lumbar spinal stenosis, associated with significant improvement in clinical outcomes and radiologic parameters. Studies with larger samples and longer follow-up periods are needed for further research.

Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for single and double segment lumbar disc herniation with sciatic scoliosis in adults: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Sciatic scoliosis can be seen in patients with lumbar disc herniation. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) is a common surgical method for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. The difference between single-segment lumbar disc herniation and double-segment lumbar disc herniation with Sciatic Scoliosis in adults after PELD needs further study. The aim of this study was to compare the imaging features of single-segment and double-segment lumbar disc herniation with Sciatic Scoliosis in adults and to further explore the clinical outcomes of functional improvement and scoliosis imaging parameters of the two groups after PELD.

METHODS

Adult patients with lumbar disc herniation with sciatic scoliosis who received PELD from January 2019 to June 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. According to the number of operative segments, the patients were divided into a single-segment group and a double-segment group. Perioperative parameters were observed and compared between the two groups. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, Oswestry dysfunction index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores (JOA) and imaging parameters of the two groups were recorded and compared before the operation and during the follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 53 patients with single segments and 21 patients with double segments were included in this study. During the follow-up, the VAS score, ODI index and JOA score of the two groups were significantly improved as compared with those before the operation(P < 0. 05). Ninety-two point five percent of single-segment patients and 90.5% of double segment patients returned to normal scoliosis within 12 months after the operation. The operation time, number of intraoperative fluoroscopy times and the amount of intraoperative blood loss in single-segment patients were better than those in double-segment group(P < 0. 05). At the last follow-up, the AVT, CBD and SVA in the double-segment group were 5.2 ± 2.3, 5.1 ± 1.0 and 12.2 ± 3.0 mm, respectively, which were higher than those in the single-segment group (1.9 ± 0.4, 1.1 ± 1.6 and 3.9 ± 2.1 mm) (P < 0. 05).

CONCLUSION

PELD is an effective treatment for single-segment and double-segment lumbar disc herniation with Sciatic scoliosis. Double-segment patients can enjoy similar clinical efficacy to single-segment patients, avoiding complications caused by decompression, fusion, and internal fixation. Scoliosis was corrected spontaneously within 12 months after operation, and the sagittal curve was significantly improved in both groups. The improvement of coronal and sagittal balance in double -segment patients may take longer.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy for migrated lumbar disc herniation at lower lumbar spine: a retrospective controlled study

BACKGROUND

Both Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy (UBED) and Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy (PEID) have resulted in favorable clinical outcomes in the management of LDH. The aim of this study is to comprehensively compare the efficacy of UBED and PEID in treating migrated LDH in the lower lumbar spine, with a specific focus on high-grade migrated LDH.

METHODS

96 patients who underwent UBED (31 cases) and PEID (65 cases) procedures were enrolled in the study. All patients received a minimum follow-up period of 6 months. Clinical outcomes of the patients were assessed with incision length, operation time, total hemoglobin loss, hospital stay, intraoperative fluoroscopy times, visual analogue scale (VAS) for lower back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), modified MacNab criteria, complications, area of lamina loss and increased intervertebral height.

RESULTS

The VAS scores for lower back and leg pain and ODI significantly decreased in both groups after the operation. Preoperatively, at 1 day, 1 month, and 6 months after the procedure, the VAS and ODI scores exhibited no significant differences between the two groups. There was no significant difference in terms of modified MacNab criteria, area of lamina loss, and increased intervertebral height. The UBED group had a longer incision length, operation time and postoperative hospital stay, and fewer intraoperative fluoroscopy times than to the PEID group. Complications were noted in both groups throughout the follow-up period, but there was no significant difference in the rate of complications. Moreover, there were no notable differences in clinical outcomes between the two groups in the high-grade migrated LDH.

CONCLUSIONS

Both UBED and PEID could achieve favorable clinical outcomes for treating migrated LDH at the lower lumbar spine. Despite the longer operative time and postoperative hospital stay associated with the UBED group, UBED remains safe and innovative for treating migrated LDH at the lower lumbar spine.

Feasibility of Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy in a Remote Government Hospital in Thailand: A Cost-Utility Analysis

BACKGROUND

Treatments for lumbar discectomy have developed over time. Recently, endoscopy has played an important role. However, a major obstacle to endoscopy in rural areas is the cost of surgery, particularly for endoscopes and disposable equipment. We assessed the cost effectiveness of endoscopic lumbar discectomy compared to the traditional open microdiscectomy technique in a government hospital in a developing country.

METHODS

This study focused on 50 patients who underwent endoscopic lumbar discectomy between April 2019 and March 2020 at Yala Regional Hospital and were reviewed by our team. The duration of hospital stays, operative time, follow-up, and clinical outcomes at one, three, and six months postoperatively were observed and compared with 30 patients who underwent microscopic lumbar discectomy. Hospital expenses were calculated and compared using t-tests.

RESULTS

Endoscopic discectomy was 4.00 days length of stay while microscopic discectomy has 9.77 days in averages. The pain score was 8.82 for endoscopic surgery and 9.1 for microscopic surgery. The operative price for the endoscopic discectomy was 144.69 USD higher than that for the open lumbar discectomy because of the disposable equipment. However, each patient in the microdiscectomy group had a longer hospital stay and required more perioperative care, which decreased the difference of the total hospital expenses (1,420.612 vs 1,399.16 USD).

CONCLUSION

Full endoscopic lumbar discectomy is an effective procedure that is beneficial for patients. The total hospital costs are not significantly different between the two procedures. To ensure that more patients receive this benefit and to develop surgical competency in government hospitals, the surgical reimbursement fee for endoscopic discectomy should be more affordable than that for conventional discectomy.

Unilateral biportal endoscopic versus uniportal full-endoscopic for lumbar degenerative disease: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing use of unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) and uniportal full-endoscopic (UPFE) techniques in lumbar degenerative disease (LDD), few comprehensive and systematic studies have been published comparing UBE and UPFE. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the surgical outcomes of the two procedures.

METHODS

We searched all studies that compared operative outcomes of UBE and UPFE for lumbar disc degeneration disease from PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang and other databases up to March 30, 2022.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis, which included nine articles, showed that in operative time, (mean difference [MD]: 17.14; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 6.52 to 27.76), intraoperative bleeding (MD: 59.01; 95% CI: 21.29 to 96.73) and hospital stay (MD: 2.12; 95% CI: 0.35 to 3.90), the UPFE group was more advantageous. UBE had an advantage in terms of postoperative dural expansion area (MD: 59.01; 95% CI: 21.29 to 96.73). These aspects included postoperative clinical score (MD: 0.48; 95% CI: -0.27 to 1.24; MD: -0.07; 95% CI: -0.30 to 0.16; MD: 0.09; 95% CI: -0.09 to 0.26; MD: 0.11; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.26; MD: -0.81; 95% CI: -3.03 to 1.41; MD: -0.38; 95% CI: -1.02 to 0.26), excellent and good rate (odds ratio [OR] = 1.08; 95% CI: 0.34 to 3.44), complications (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.31 to 2.12), postoperative hospital stay (MD: 1.63; 95% CI: -0.81 to 4.07) and mean number of fluoroscopies (MD: -7.18; 95% CI: -22.84 to 8.48), with no significant difference between the two groups. Meanwhile, the lumbar disc herniation (LDH) subgroup of UPFE had a significantly shorter operation time (MD: 31.67; 95% CI: 12.44 to 50.90) than that of UBE.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that UPFE was associated with shorter operative time, less intraoperative bleeding and shorter hospital stay, whereas UBE was associated with a greater increase in postoperative dural sac area. Postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, satisfaction rates, complications, and mean number of fluoroscopic views were not dramatically dissimilar in UBE and UPFE for LDD. In the LDH subgroup, postoperative hospital stay and operative time were significantly lower in the UPFE group than in the UBE group.

Unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus conventional interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis compares the efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) to conventional interbody fusion in lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD).

METHODS

An extensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Research related to UBE-TLIF published up to November 2022 was reviewed. The relevant articles were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, as well as an evaluation of the quality of the data extraction literature. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3 software.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included six high-quality case-control trials (CCTs) involving 621 subjects. The clinical outcomes assessment showed no statistical differences in complication rates, fusion rates, leg pain VAS scores, or ODI scores. After UBE-TLIF, low back pain VAS scores were significantly improved with less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter hospital stay. A longer time was required for UBE-TLIF, however.

CONCLUSION

Despite the lack of sufficient high quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in this study, the results of this meta-analysis suggest that UBE-TLIF is more effective than open surgery in terms of length of stay, blood loss reduction during surgery, and improved low back pain after surgery. Nevertheless, the evidence will be supplemented in the future by more and better quality multicenter randomized controlled trials.

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Laminectomy-Bilateral Decompression Using a Monoportal Scope and Bipolar Coagulator for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Technical Report

The purpose of this study was to introduce the application of a monoportal scope and bipolar coagulator used in full-endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) for unilateral biportal endoscopy-unilateral laminectomy bilateral decompression (UBE-ULBD) in those with central stenosis. A 68-year-old man who presented with cauda equina symptoms underwent UBE-ULBD to improve his central stenosis at the L2/3 level. In this technique, a FESS scope was attached to a camera portal in place of a common arthroscope. A decompression tool was subsequently inserted through the working portal, and the lower border of the vertebral lamina and the lower border of the contralateral lamina were resected. Additionally, the superior border of the L3 level was thinned using a high-speed drill, and the ligament flavum was excised. The operation time was 70 minutes, and his symptoms improved. The patient was discharged from the hospital four days postoperatively. We found three advantages of using a FESS scope and bipolar coagulator, including the ability to 1) stabilize the camera via placement of the sleeve against the bone, 2) minimize the wounded area by irrigating saline on the side of the scope, and 3) provide bipolar tissue hemostasis in an isolated area around the nerves. Therefore, among the UBE techniques, we believe that assisted full-endoscopic spine surgery (AFESS) is a viable option to offer a more minimally invasive surgery for patients with stenosis.

"Early Efficacy and Safety of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Minimal Invasive in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Diseases"

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the early clinical efficacy and radiologic outcomes between unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Along with the continuous development of endoscopic technology, the early safety and effectiveness of ULIF technology are still unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 61 patients who underwent fusion surgery through ULIF or MIS-TLIF in 2021. Twenty-nine patients underwent ULIF (group A), and 32 underwent MIS-TLIF (group B). Fusion rate, bone graft volume, hidden blood loss (HBL), C-reactive protein level, operative time, Oswestry Disability Index , Visual Analog Scale score, and MacNab criteria were assessed in both groups.

RESULTS

The Visual Analog Scale score for back pain in the early postoperative period was significantly lower in group A than in group B ( P <0.05). All other clinical scores showed improvement, with no significant difference between the 2 groups ( P >0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative C-reactive protein levels and fusion rates between the 2 groups ( P >0.05). However, HBL was higher and operative time was longer in group A than in group B ( P <0.05). Most importantly, there were no statistically significant differences between groups A and B in fusion rate, length of stay and bone graft volume ( P >0.05). No serious surgical complications occurred in our study.

CONCLUSIONS

ULIF is a new option for lumbar fusion. Despite the drawbacks of longer operation time and higher HBL, ULIF may be a viable alternative to MIS-TLIF as technology advances.

A Beginner's Perspective on Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery in Single-Level Lumbar Decompression: A Comparative Study with a Microscopic Surgery

Background

The application of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) in spine surgery is increasing. However, the clinical results of related studies have been inconsistent. In this study, the perioperative and clinical outcomes of two techniques in single-level lumbar decompression surgery were compared using the perspective of a spine surgeon experienced in microscopic surgery but inexperienced in BESS.

Methods

This is a retrospective study performed with prospectively collected data. From April 2019, 50 consecutive patients who underwent a single-level lumbar decompression surgery with BESS were evaluated. Additionally, the data of 150 consecutive patients who underwent the same microscopic surgery before April 2019 were collected. We performed 1 : 1 ratio propensity score matching for these two groups to adjust for baseline variables. The postoperative patient-reported outcome measures included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and numeric rating scale for the back and leg preoperatively and at 6 months after surgery. The laboratory data (C-reactive protein [CRP, mg/L] and hemoglobin [Hb, g/dL]) were measured preoperatively and 3 times (1, 2, and 3 or 4 days) postoperatively. In these periods, the peak and lowest CRP and Hb concentrations were evaluated. The perioperative outcomes, operation time (from skin incision to dressing), length of hospital stay, drainage (for 24 hours after surgery), and surgery-related complications were also evaluated.

Results

Forty-seven patients (27 men and 20 women) were included in each group. The postoperative 6-month ODI was significantly lower in the BESS group than in the microscope group (6.90 ± 5.98 vs. 11.54 ± 9.70). The peak CRP concentration (16.63 ± 19.41 vs. 42.40 ± 37.73, p < 0.001) and CRP increment (peak CRP minus preoperative CRP, 14.69 ± 19.47 vs. 40.71 ± 37.32, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the microscope group. Operation time (83.72 ± 35.71 vs. 70.27 ± 23.24, p = 0.047) was significantly longer in the BESS group. Surgery-related complications were found in 6 and 3 cases in the BESS group (3 revisions, 2 dural tears, and 1 conversion to open surgery) and microscope group (2 revisions and 1 hematoma), respectively.

Conclusions

BESS as a new technique resulted in satisfying short-term outcomes. It was a well-tolerated option for surgical treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative disease. The relatively high incidence of recurrence at the index level and incidental dural tears should be considered for surgeons new to BESS; however, these were manageable complications.

Comparison of Primary Versus Revision Lumbar Discectomy Using a Biportal Endoscopic Technique

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcomes of the biportal endoscopic technique for primary lumbar discectomy (BE-LD) and revision lumbar discectomy (BE-RLD).

METHODS

Eighty-one consecutive patients who underwent BE-LD or BE-RLD, and could be followed up for at least 12 months were divided into two groups: Group A (BE-LD; n = 59) and Group B (BE-RLD; n = 22). Clinical outcomes included the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab's criteria. Perioperative results included operation time (OT), length of hospital stay (LOS), amount of surgical drain, and kinetics of serum creatine phosphokinase (CPK) and C-reactive protein (CRP). Clinical and perioperative outcomes were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 2 days and at 3, 6, and 12 months. Postoperative complications were noted.

RESULTS

Both groups showed significant improvement in pain (VAS) and disability (ODI) compared to baseline values at postoperative day 2, which lasted until the final follow-up. There were no significant differences in the improvement of the VAS and ODI scores between the groups. According to the modified MacNab's criteria, 88.1 and 90.9% of the patients were excellent or good in groups A and B, respectively. OT, LOS, amount of surgical drain, and kinetics in serum CRP and CPK levels were comparable. Complications in Group A included incidental durotomy (n = 2), epidural hematoma (n = 1), and local recurrence (n = 1) and in Group B incidental durotomy (n = 1) and epidural hematoma (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

BE-RLD showed favorable clinical outcomes, less postoperative pain, and early laboratory recovery equivalent to BE-LD.

How I do it: the biportal endoscopic inclined-ipsilateral technique to decompress the lumbar lateral recess

BACKGROUND

Various full-endoscopic techniques have been developed to reach the lateral recess of the lumbar spine. However, specialized surgical tools, including expensive spinal endoscopic systems, and a steeper learning curve to mastering the technique are required.

METHOD

We present a novel target-addressed unilateral biportal endoscopic technique to reach directly the lumbar lateral recess, particularly useful at L4-L5 and L5-S1. The technique follows an inclined-ipsilateral trajectory to preserve the lateral extension of ligamentum flavum and the facet joint as much as possible.

CONCLUSION

This technique was associated with all the advantages of minimally invasive decompressive procedures and outstanding outcomes.

Comparison of efficacy between unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and prognosis of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar fusion (ULIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar fusion (MIS-TLIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases.

METHODS

Chinese and English databases were retrieved for the period from database creation to December 31, 2022. Case-control studies on unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar fusion were collected. The observation indexes consisted of operation times, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain score, postoperative oswestry disability index score, postoperative MacNab excellent and good rate, imaging fusion rate at the last follow-up, and complications. The NO rating table was employed to assess the quality of the included literature, and a meta-analysis was conducted using Revman5.4.1 and Stata17.

RESULTS

Ten studies with 738 surgical patients were considered, including 347 patients in the ULIF group and 391 in the MIS-TLIF group. This Meta-analysis demonstrated statistically significant differences in mean operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, length of hospital stay, and early postoperative (1-2W) visual analogue scale/score (VAS) scores for back pain. No significant differences were observed in the final follow-up postoperative VAS scores for back pain, postoperative leg VAS score, postoperative oswestry disability index score, excellent and good rate of postoperative modified MacNab, imaging fusion rate, and complications.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the MIS-TLIF group, the ULIF group had longer operation time, lower intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume, lower lumbar VAS score in the early postoperative period, and shorter hospital stay. ULIF is less invasive than traditional MIS-TLIF, making it a trustworthy surgical option for lumbar degenerative diseases with comparable fusion efficiency, superior MacNab rate, and complication rate.

Unilateral Bi/Multi-Portal Endoscopy for the Treatment of Complicated Lumbar Degenerative Diseases with Utilization of Uniaxial Spinal Endoscope, Instead of Arthroscope: Technique Note and Clinical Results

Objective

This article aims to discuss a novel surgical strategy, referred to as unilateral bi/multi-portal endoscopy (UME), which used a uniaxial spinal endoscope instead of an arthroscope in the traditional unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) surgical procedure in our study of the treatment of complicated lumbar degenerative diseases.

Methods

This retrospective study included 42 patients diagnosed with high-migrated lumbar disc herniation and bilateral spinal stenosis who underwent UME surgery from January 2021 to December 2021. Patients included 20 men and 22 women, with an average age of 55.97±14.92 years. The average follow-up period was 13.19 months. The demographic data, operation time (min), and complications were recorded and analyzed. The visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were used to evaluate the surgical outcomes. Three-dimensional CT scans and MRI were conducted to evaluate the radiographic improvement.

Results

A total of 26 patients were diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation and 16 with lumbar spinal stenosis. All 42 patients underwent UME surgery and achieved satisfactory outcomes. The operation time was 154.46±46.09 min. The average follow-up time was 13.19±1.33 months. The preoperative back pain (VAS-Back) and the last follow-up VAS-Back were 3.84±1.00 and 0.70±0.46, respectively (P < 0.05). The preoperative leg pain (VAS-Leg) and the last follow-up VAS-Leg were 6.46±1.08 and 1.03±0.64, respectively (P <0.05). Significant differences existed between preoperative ODI scores (58.70±11.22%) and the last follow-up ODI scores (9.24±3.04%; P<0.05). All patients achieved significant pain relief and functional improvement after the surgery. No severe complications occurred, except for two cases of postoperative dysesthesia and one case suffered from vertebral compression fractures induced by a postoperative accidental injury. Symptoms of numbness disappeared within one week with treatment using dexamethasone and neurotrophic drugs. The vertebral fracture case recovered with percutaneous kyphoplasty treatment.

Conclusion

This study suggests that UME is a promising treatment strategy for high-migrated disc herniation and bilateral spinal stenosis.

Clinical outcomes and complications after biportal endoscopic spine surgery: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of 3673 cases

PURPOSE

Current literature suggests that biportal spinal endoscopy is safe and effective in treating lumbar spine pathology such as lumbar disc herniation, lumbar stenosis, and degenerative spondylolisthesis. No prior study has investigated the postoperative outcomes or complication profile of the technique as a whole. This study serves as the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of biportal spinal endoscopy in the lumbar spine.

METHODS

A PubMed literature search provided over 100 studies. 42 papers were reviewed and 3673 cases were identified with average follow-up time of 12.5 months. Preoperative diagnoses consisted of acute disc herniation (1098), lumbar stenosis (2432), and degenerative spondylolisthesis (229). Demographics, operative details, complications, and perioperative outcome and satisfaction scores were analyzed.

RESULTS

Average age was 61.32 years, 48% male. 2402 decompressions, 1056 discectomies, and 261 transforaminal lumbar Interbody fusions (TLIFs) were performed. Surgery was performed on 4376 lumbar levels, with L4-5 being most common(61.3%). 290 total complications occurred, 2.23% durotomies, 1.29% inadequate decompressions, 3.79% epidural hematomas, and < 1% transient nerve root injuries, infections, and iatrogenic instability. Significant improvement in VAS-Back, VAS-Leg, ODI, and Macnab Scores were seen across the cohort.

CONCLUSION

Biportal spinal endoscopy is a novel method to address pathology in the lumbar spine with direct visualization through an endoscopic approach. Complications are comparable to previously published rates. Clinical outcomes demonstrate effectiveness. Prospective studies are required to assess the efficacy of the technique as compared to traditional techniques. This study demonstrates that the technique can be successful in the lumbar spine.

Enhanced recovery after surgery pathway with modified biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using a large cage. Comparative study with minimally invasive microscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

PURPOSE

Studies about the clinical efficacy of endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion using an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway are insufficient. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate clinical usefulness of biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using an ERAS compared with microscopic TLIF.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data were retrospectively analyzed. Patients who received modified biportal endoscopic TLIF with ERAS were grouped into an endoscopic TLIF group. Those who received microscopic TLIF without ERAS were grouped into a microscopic TLIF group. Clinical and radiologic parameters were compared between two groups. Fusion rate was evaluated using sagittal reconstruction images of postoperative computed tomographic (CT) scan.

RESULTS

There were 32 patients in the endoscopic TLIF group with ERAS and 41 patients in the microscopic TLIF group without ERAS. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back pain preoperatively at day one and day two were significantly (p < 0.05) higher in the non-ERAS microscopic TLIF group than in the ERAS endoscopic TLIF group. Preoperative Oswestry Disability Index were significantly improved at the last follow-up in both groups. The fusion rate at postoperative one year was 87.5% in the endoscopic TLIF group and 85.4% in the microscopic TLIF group.

CONCLUSION

Biportal endoscopic TLIF with ERAS pathway may have good aspect to accelerate recovery after surgery. There was no inferiority of fusion rate of endoscopic TLIF comparing to microscopic TLIF. Biportal endoscopic TLIF using a large cage with ERAS pathway may be a good alternative treatment for lumbar degenerative disease.

Biportal endoscopic surgery for lumbar spine herniated discs: a narrative review of its clinical application and outcomes

Lumbar disk herniation (LDH) is a common condition affecting millions worldwide. The management of LDH has evolved over the years, with the development of newer surgical techniques that aim to provide better outcomes with minimal invasiveness. One promising emerging technique is biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS), which utilizes specialized endoscopic equipment to treat LDH through two small incisions. This review aims to assess the effectiveness of BESS as a management option for LDH by analyzing the available literature on surgical outcomes and potential complications associated with the technique. Our review shows that BESS is associated with favorable postoperative results as judged by clinical scoring systems, such as visual analog scale, Oswestry disability index, and MacNab criteria. BESS has several advantages over traditional open surgery, including minimized blood loss, a shorter duration of hospitalization, and an expedited healing process. However, the technique has limitations, such as a steep learning curve and practical challenges for surgeons. Our review offers recommendations for the optimal use of BESS in clinical practice, and provides a foundation for future research and development in this field, aiming to improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Patent blue versus methylene blue and indigo carmine as a better dye for chromodiscography: in vitro staining efficacy and cytotoxicity study using bovine coccygeal intervertebral discs

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Chromodiscography is an integral part of full-endoscopic discectomy (FED), comprising ordinary discography with radiopacity produced by contrast medium and intradiscal stain for visualizing annular defects in the endoscopic field. Nevertheless, concerns remain about the cytotoxicity of the stains used. The study of their staining efficacy is also lacking.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of methylene blue, patent blue, and indigo carmine for intradiscal injection, investigate the effectiveness of each dye, and define critical concentration with adequate staining efficacy and tolerable cytotoxicity for use in chromodiscography during FED.

STUDY DESIGN

An experimental in vitro study.

METHODS

Dye stock solutions were prepared from powder. The stock was diluted with culture medium or balanced saline and used for cytotoxicity or intervertebral disc staining assays, respectively. Bovine tails were obtained from the local slaughterhouse and functional spine units of intervertebral discs were acquired by transverse incision at the disc level. Each disc was punctured over the posterolateral aspect using a surgical knife to simulate an annular defect. The intradiscal injection was performed with each dye at different concentrations using a 22G needle from the contralateral aspect of the punctured site. Staining efficacy was quantified using ImageJ software. Primary cells of bovine tails were cultivated in each dye at different concentrations. Cytotoxicity was assessed 24 hours after stain exposure using the CCK-8 toxicity assay.

RESULTS

Staining efficacy and cytotoxicity were proportional to the concentration of tested dyes. Lower limits of concentration producing significant staining efficacy of indigo carmine, methylene blue, and patent blue were 0.25 mg/mL, 0.25 mg/mL, and 0.05 mg/mL, respectively. Compared with controls, concentrations showing significant toxicity for indigo carmine, methylene blue, and patient blue were 1 mg/mL, 0.5 mg/mL, and 2.5 mg/mL, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patent blue can serve as a more suitable tissue stain than either indigo carmine or methylene blue due to the widest range of tradeoff concentration within 0.05 to 2.5 mg/mL.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Patent blue with the characteristic of good staining efficacy and lower cytotoxicity may be a promising option for chromodiscography during FED.

Transforaminal Interbody Fusion Using the Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Technique Compared With Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spine Diseases: Analysis of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes

BACKGROUND

There has been a widespread application of minimally invasive spinal surgery techniques in the past few years. Unilateral biportal endoscopic has been successfully used in a variety of lumbar spine diseases, but there are few studies on lumbar fusion assisted by unilateral biportal endoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of transforaminal interbody fusion using the unilateral biportal endoscopic technique (UBEIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in patients with lumbar disease.

METHODS

We studied 128 patients, 58 in the UBEIF group and 70 in the TLIF group. The Oswestry disability index, creatine kinase, visual analog score (VAS) for leg and back pain were used to assess clinical outcomes. Radiographic outcomes were assessed using the fusion rate, internal fixation loosening, and adjacent segment degeneration.

RESULTS

Back and leg pain VAS scores in both groups were significantly lower 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery ( P < .05). A significant reduction in Oswestry disability index in both groups was observed 6 and 12 months after surgery ( P < .05). Compared with the TLIF group at 1 week after surgery, UBEIF patients' VAS score for back pain significantly improved ( P < .05). There was no difference in fusion rate between the 2 groups (98.27% vs 98.57%).

CONCLUSION

UBEIF and TLIF have similar clinical and radiographic outcomes in the treatment of single-segment lumbar disease with lumbar instability, including improved back and leg pain, improved disability, and high fusion rates. Furthermore, with UBEIF, less blood is lost, there is better relief of early back pain, and hospital stays are shorter.

Uniportal versus biportal endoscopic spine surgery: a comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic spine surgery techniques are minimally invasive alternatives to conventional open surgery for degenerative spinal diseases. Clinical studies and meta-analyses have proven the usefulness of uniportal full-endoscopic spine procedures. However, a steep learning curve is a critical barrier for endoscopic procedures. Recently, biportal endoscopic spine surgeries have been developed to make it easier for spine surgeons to learn and perform. Consequently, the biportal approach has gained popularity among aspiring endoscopic spine surgeons. This review compared the characteristics of uniportal and biportal surgeries to help spine surgeons perform endoscopic procedures more effectively.

AREA COVERED

The review analyzed English-language clinical literature in Core databases and compared uniportal and biportal endoscopic spine surgery techniques. Clinical studies have compared the technical principles of both techniques, and the authors suggested appropriate strategies for learning and practicing endoscopic procedures.

EXPERT OPINION

Uniportal, full-endoscopic spine surgery is a minimally invasive procedure that preserves muscles and uses a keyhole approach under local anesthesia. In contrast, biportal surgery is more familiar to a surgeon and can be performed more widely, although the keyhole approach is limited. Aspiring endoscopic spine surgeons can learn either method according to the surgeon's preference and the clinical situation.

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy versus Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) is a novel and minimally invasive surgery for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). However, efficacy and safety of UBED compared to the conventional percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) remains to be determined. A meta-analysis was performed in this study to compare between UBED and PELD for LDH.

METHODS

Relevant cohort studies were found by searching Medline, Web of Science, Embase, Wanfang, and CNKI from database inception to October 13, 2022. Results were pooled using a random-effects model incorporating heterogeneity.

RESULTS

In this meta-analysis, 12 studies involving 1175 patients with LDH were included. Pooled results showed that compared with PELD, UBED was associated with a longer surgery time (mean difference [MD] 17.62 min, P < 0.001) and hospital stay (MD 1.40 day, P = 0.04). However, UBED and PELD showed comparative efficacies in improving the Visual Analogue Scale of leg and back, and Oswestry Disability Index, scores. The incidence of perioperative complications was not significantly different between the 2 procedures (risk ratio [RR] 1.62, P = 0.25), while UBED was associated with a lower LDH recurrence during follow-up (RR 0.29, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Although UBED is associated with longer surgery time and hospital stay, it shows similar efficacy to PELD in relieving pain and improving functional ability in patients with LDH. In addition, limited evidence suggests that UBED may be associated with a lower LDH recurrence as compared to PELD, while the incidence of perioperative complications is not different. These findings support UBED as a treatment for patients with LDH.

Background, techniques, applications, current trends, and future directions of minimally invasive endoscopic spine surgery: A review of literature

Across many of the surgical specialties, the use of minimally invasive techniques that utilize indirect visualization has been increasingly replacing traditional techniques which utilize direct visualization. Arthroscopic surgery of the appendicular skeleton has evolved dramatically and become an integral part of musculoskeletal surgery over the last several decades, allowing surgeons to achieve similar or better outcomes, while reducing cost and recovery time. However, to date, the axial skeleton, with its close proximity to critical neural and vascular structures, has not adopted endoscopic techniques at as rapid of a rate. Over the past decade, increased patient demand for less invasive spine surgery combined with surgeon desire to meet these demands has driven significant evolution and innovation in endoscopic spine surgery. In addition, there has been an enormous advancement in technologies that assist in navigation and automation that help surgeons circumvent limitations of direct visualization inherent to less invasive techniques. There are currently a multitude of endoscopic techniques and approaches that can be utilized in the treatment of spine disorders, many of which are evolving rapidly. Here we present a review of the field of endoscopic spine surgery, including the background, techniques, applications, current trends, and future directions, to help providers gain a better understanding of this growing modality in spine surgery.

Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Approach Selection: A Systematic Review and Proposed Algorithm

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review of the literature to develop an algorithm formulated by key opinion leaders.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze currently available data and propose a decision-making algorithm for full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy for treating lumbar disc herniation (LDH) to help surgeons choose the most appropriate approach [transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD) or interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy (IELD)] for patients.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Full-endoscopic discectomy has gained popularity in recent decades. To our knowledge, an algorithm for choosing the proper surgical approach has never been proposed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of the literature using PubMed and MeSH terms was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Patient samples included patients with LDH treated with full-endoscopic discectomy. The inclusion criteria were interventional research (randomized and nonrandomized trials) and observation research (cohort, case-control, case series). Exclusion criteria were case series and technical reports. The criteria used for selecting patients were grouped and analyzed. Then, an algorithm was generated based on these findings with support and reconfirmation from key expert opinions. Data on overall complications were collected. Outcome measures included zone of herniation, level of herniation, and approach (TELD or IELD).

RESULTS

In total, 474 articles met the initial screening criteria. The detailed analysis identified the 80 best-matching articles; after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 53 articles remained for this review.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed algorithm suggests a TELD for LDH located in the foraminal or extraforaminal zones at upper and lower levels and for central and subarticular discs at the upper levels considering the anatomic foraminal features and the craniocaudal pathology location. An IELD is preferred for LDH in the central or subarticular zones at L4/L5 and L5/S1, especially if a high iliac crest or high-grade migration is found.

Clinical Characteristics of Minimal Lumbar Disc Herniation and Efficacy of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy via Transforaminal Approach: A Retrospective Study

Objective: To define the characteristics of Mini LDH, develop new diagnostic references and examine the clinical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy via a transforaminal approach (TF-PELD) for it. Methods: A total of 72 patients who underwent TF-PELD with Mini LDH from September 2019 to October 2022 were enrolled in this retrospective study. The patients’ basic information, symptoms, number of outpatient visits, duration of conservative treatment, physical examination findings and so on were obtained from the medical records. Clinical effects of TF-PELD for Mini LDH were assessed by means of the following: the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for low back pain (LBP) and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for functional status assessment and Modified Mac Nab criteria for patient satisfaction. Results: Mini LDH have specific clinical characteristics and imaging features. All included patients achieved obvious pain relief after TF-PELD surgery. Pain scores were repeated at postoperative day 1 and 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months later. Results were statistically analyzed. The average VAS-Back, VAS-Leg and ODI scores were all significantly reduced at the first postoperative day and gradually decreased with the follow-up time continuing. In total, 66 out of 72 patients received an excellent or good recovery and no poor result was reported according to the Modified Mac Nab criteria. Conclusions: Mini LDH is a type of LDH with special characteristics and in need of correct diagnosis and active treatment in clinical work. TF-PELD was also found to be an effective procedure for the treatment of Mini LDH.

Comparison of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty and lumbar discectomy (FEFLD), unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy, and microdiscectomy (MD) for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty and lumbar discectomy (FEFLD), unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy, and microdiscectomy (MD) in the treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

METHODS

From January 2020 and May 2021, 128 patients with single-level LDH at L4-5 or L5-S1 received FEFLD, UBE discectomy or MD. Patients were divided into three groups according to surgical method: the FEFLD group (n = 43), the UBE group (n = 42), and the MD group (n = 43). Operative time, fluoroscopy frequency, in-bed time, length of hospital stays, total expenses, complications, visual analogue scale (VAS, 0-10), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, 0-100%) were assessed and compared among three groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in VAS or ODI scores at 12 months after surgery among three groups. In comparison with the MD group, the FEFLD and UBE group yield better VAS scores for back pain on the first day following surgery (P < 0.05). The FEFLD group was superior to the UBE group or MD group with less time in bed and shorter hospital stay (P < 0.05). The operation time and total expenses in the UBE group were significantly longer and higher than those in the FEFLD group or MD group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

FEFLD and UBE discectomy yield comparable results to conventional MD concerning pain relief and functional outcomes. In addition, FEFLD and UBE discectomy enable less back pain in the immediate postoperative period. FEFLD offers advantages in rapid recovery. Conventional MD is still an efficient and cost-effective surgical procedure.

Clinical outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) compared with conventional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF)

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

In recent years, unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) has been more and more favored by spinal surgeons because of its advantages of low trauma, rapid recovery, high fusion rate and fewer complications.

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical effects of ULIF with those of conventional open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective case control study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Twenty-seven patients treated by ULIF and thirty-three patients treated by PLIF.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The preoperative baseline and surgical technique-related outcomes (mean operation time, blood loss during operation, postoperative drainage, and postoperative hospital stay) were compared between the two groups. The clinical status of the two groups before and after surgery were also compared: visual analogue scale (VAS) score of the legs and back, Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The clinical laboratory indexes of the two groups before and after the operation were compared: C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), creatine phosphokinase (CPK), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), as well as the incidence of complications, such as dural tear, nerve root injury and infection.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent L3-S1 single level lumbar interbody fusion were included in the study. They were divided into a PLIF group and a ULIF group according to the type of surgery. This study comprised 60 cases: 27 cases in the ULIF group and thirty-three cases in the PLIF group.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in preoperative baseline between the two groups. The ULIF group experienced less blood loss, postoperative drainage and a shorter postoperative hospital stay than the PLIF group; however the ULIF group required a longer operation time than the PLIF group (p<.05). CRP, ESR, CPK, IL-6, and TNF-α levels of the PLIF group were all significantly higher than those of the ULIF group 5 days after surgery (p<.05). The improvements in the VAS scores for back pain, VAS scores for leg pain and JOA score in the ULIF group were all significantly better than those in the PLIF group at 5 days after surgery (p<.05). There was no significant difference in fusion rate at 6 months between the 2 groups (p>.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that ULIF and PLIF were both effective surgical techniques for lumbar interbody fusion. However, ULIF caused less bleeding, reduced inflammatory reaction, less tissue damage and faster postoperative recovery compared with PLIF. Both long-term follow-up and larger clinical studies are needed to validate the clinical and radiological results of this surgery.

Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation

Purpose

To compare the clinical outcomes of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) for the treatment of single-level lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

Materials and methods

From January 2020 to November 2021, 62 patients with single-level LDH were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent spinal surgeries at the Affiliated Hospital of Chengde Medical University and Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University. Among them, 30 patients were treated with UBE, and 32 were treated with PTED. The patients were followed up for at least one year. Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes were reviewed before and after surgery. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain and leg pain, and modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. x-ray examinations were performed one year after surgery to assess the stability of the lumbar spine.

Results

The mean ages in the UBE and PTED groups were 46.7 years and 48.0 years, respectively. Compared to the UBE group, the PTED group had better VAS scores for back pain at 1 and 7 days after surgery (3.06 ± 0.80 vs. 4.03 ± 0.81, P < 0.05; 2.81 ± 0.60 vs. 3.70 ± 0.79, P < 0.05). The UBE and PTED groups demonstrated significant improvements in the VAS score for leg pain and ODI score, and no significant differences were found between the groups at any time after the first month (P > 0.05). Although the good-to-excellent rate of the modified MacNab criteria in the UBE group was similar to that in the PTED group (86.7% vs. 87.5%, P > 0.05), PTED was advantageous in terms of the operation time, estimated blood loss, incision length, and length of postoperative hospital stay.

Conclusions

Both UBE and PTED have favorable outcomes in patients with single-level LDH. However, PTED is superior to UBE in terms of short-term postoperative back pain relief and perioperative quality of life.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Muscle Invasiveness between Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation at L5/S1 Level

OBJECTIVE

Both unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) could achieve favorable outcomes for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). There are limited studies comparing the two different methods of endoscopic discectomy. The objective was to comprehensively compare the clinical outcome and muscle invasiveness of UBED and PEID for the treatment of LDH at L5/S1 level with at least 1-year follow-up.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study enrolled 106 LDH patients of L5/S1 level from January 2018 to December 2020. There were 51 patients who underwent UBED (22 males and 29 females, 43.8 ± 14.2 years old) and 55 patients underwent PEID (28 males and 27 females, 42.3 ± 13.8 years old). Clinical outcomes and surgical invasiveness were compared between the two groups for at least 1 year follow-up. Clinical outcomes included visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), complications, recurrence of LDH, intraoperative anesthesia time, operative time, number of intraoperative fluoroscopies, and postoperative length of stay. Surgical invasiveness was evaluated with serum CPK level and change rate of lean multifidus cross-sectional area (LMCSA). Independent-sample t test and paired sample t test were used to compare continuous data. Chi-square test and Fisher's precision probability tests were used to analyze the categorical data.

RESULTS

Both groups achieved favorable clinical outcomes at the last follow-up, including VAS and ODI (all Ps <0.05). The intraoperative anesthesia time for UBED was longer, but with no difference of operative time. As for intraoperative fluoroscopy times (2.5 vs 2.4), postoperative length of stay (2.1 vs 2.0 days), postoperative complications (5.9% vs 3.6%), there were also no significant difference. The serum CPK level and change rate of LMCSA for UBED was higher than PEID at postoperative 1st day. At the last follow-up, there was no significant difference in the change rate of LMCSA between the two groups (P = 0.096).

CONCLUSIONS

Both UBED and PEID could achieve favorable clinical outcomes for the treatment of L5/S1 LDH. Despite UBED is more invasive, the radiological manifestation of paraspinal muscle invasiveness was equal at last follow-up with at least 1 year. UBED is a safe and innovative alternative choice for treatment of LDH at L5/S1 level.

Modified Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Results in Improved Clinical Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and describe the clinical efficacy and safety of a modified unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy.

METHODS

From February 2019 to February 2020, patients who met the inclusion criteria were treated using a modified unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy. During the operation, the herniated disc was removed and the ligamentum flavum was preserved. Clinical efficacy was assessed via postoperative imaging and follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 70 patients were followed up for more than 2 years, including 51 males and 19 females, aged 49.4 ± 16.0 years. All operations were completed and no complications were noted. Postoperative lumbar magnetic resonance imaging showed that the decompression of the nerve root was sufficient and the ligamentum flavum was preserved in all patients. Postoperative lumbar CT showed that the caudal lamina and inferior articular process of the cephalad vertebral were partially removed. Lower back and leg pain were significantly relieved after surgery, and the Oswestry Disability Index was significantly improved compared to presurgery measurements (P ＜ 0.01). After 2 years of follow-up, the sensory and muscle strength of nerve roots were significantly recovered (P ＜ 0.01). According to the MacNab score of the patients, 40 cases were defined as "excellent," 26 cases were "good," 2 cases were "fair," and 2 cases were "poor."

CONCLUSIONS

Modified unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy can completely remove a lumbar herniated disc; relieve lower back and leg pain; improve lumbar function; reduce the risk of dural tearing, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, and epidural hematoma; and reduce the epidural adhesion and arachnoiditis caused by ligamentum flavum resection.

Biportal endoscopic versus microscopic discectomy for lumbar herniated disc: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Biportal endoscopic discectomy has been frequently performed in recent years and has shown acceptable clinical outcomes. However, evidence regarding its efficacy and safety remains limited.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of biportal endoscopic with that of open microscopic discectomy in patients with single-level herniated lumbar discs.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, multicenter, open-label, assessor-blind, non-inferiority controlled trial.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Sixty-four participants suffering from low back and leg pain with a single-level herniated lumbar disc and required discectomy.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes were assessed with the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), visual analog scale (VAS) pain score for surgical site, low back and lower extremity, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for lumbar disabilities, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions value for quality of life, and painDETECT for neuropathic pain. Surgery-related outcomes such as hospital stay, operation time, and opioid usage were collected. Adverse events occurring during the follow-up period were also noted.

METHODS

All participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo biportal endoscopic (biportal group) or microscopic discectomy (microscopy group). The primary outcome was the difference in ODI scores at 12-months post surgically based on a modified intention-to-treat strategy, with a non-inferiority margin of 12.8 points. The secondary outcomes included PROMs, surgery-related outcomes, and adverse events.

RESULTS

The ODI score at the 12-month follow-up was 11.97 in the microscopy group and 13.89 in the biportal group (mean difference, 1.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.50 to 7.34), showing the non-inferiority of biportal group. The results for the secondary outcomes were similar to those for the primary outcome. Creatinine phosphokinase ratios were low in the biportal group. Early surgical site pain was slightly lower in the biportal group (mean difference of VAS pain score at 48-hr, -0.98; 95% CI, -1.77 to -0.19). Adverse events including reoperation showed no significant difference between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Biportal endoscopic discectomy was non-inferior to microscopic discectomy over a 12 month period. Biportal endoscopic discectomy is suggested to be a relatively safe and effective surgical technique with the slight advantage of reduced muscle damage. However, the clinical implications of surgical site pain should be carefully considered.

Optimal approach for total endoscopic discectomy and its effect on lumbar and leg function in patients with disc herniation

BACKGROUND

Disc herniation (DH) is a fragment of the disc nucleus that is pushed out of the annulus into the spinal canal due to a tear or rupture in the annulus. It is a common cause of lumbar and leg pains. Substantial advancements have been made to determine the cause of DH and to ensure accurate diagnosis, imaging, and treatment of this condition. Total endoscopic discectomy is an alternative surgical technique that is less invasive.

AIM

To study the optimal approach for a total endoscopic discectomy and its influence on lumbar and leg function in DH patients.

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled 120 patients with lumbar DH who were treated in our hospital from February 2018 to January 2021. All patients were randomly divided into the following two groups: The observation group, comprising 62 patients who underwent surgery using the interlaminar approach, and the control group, comprising 58 patients who were operated through the foramina approach. The treatment effects, perioperative indicators, functional recovery, pain, and quality of life were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The treatment effect in the observation group (93.55%) was significantly better than that in the control group (77.59%). There was no difference in the operative time and intraoperative blood loss amount between the two groups (P > 0.05). The hospitalization time of the observation group (4.34 ± 1.33 d) was significantly shorter than that of the control group (5.38 ± 1.57 days) (P < 0.05). The Japanese Orthopaedic Association and Oswestry Disability Index scores decreased significantly in both groups after treatment, but the scores were lower in the observation group than in the control group. The visual analog scale scores of the lower back and legs of the two groups were significantly reduced after treatment, but scores were lower in the observation group (2.18 ± 0.88 in the lower back and 1.42 ± 0.50 in the leg) than in the control group (3.53 ± 0.50 in the lower back and 2.21 ± 0.52 in the leg). A short form of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2 measurement scale (AIMS2-SF) score and Barthel index of the lower back of the two groups increased significantly after treatment, with the observation group having a significantly higher AIMS2-SF score (95.16 ± 1.74) and Barthel index (97.29 ± 1.75) than the control group (84.95 ± 2.14 and 89.16 ± 2.71, respectively) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Through total endoscopic discectomy with the interlaminar approach, the degree of pain in the waist and leg was reduced, and the lumbar function considerably recovered.