Search Results (10)

Background/Objectives: Biportal endoscopic spine surgery (BESS) is one of the minimally invasive spine surgery techniques. BESS has several advantages, such as better visualization, less muscle injury, early rehabilitation, etc. Due to its clear visualization, delicate intraoperative hemostasis of the bleeding foci, including cancellous bone and small epidural vessels, can be achieved. Therefore, some authors have reported that BESS resulted in less intraoperative visible blood loss (VBL) compared to conventional open surgery. However, it is difficult to analyze the exact amount of intraoperative blood loss because of the continuous normal saline irrigation. In addition, hidden blood loss (HBL) tends to be overlooked, and the amount of HBL might be larger than expected. We aim to calculate the amount of HBL during BESS and to compare our findings with convention open surgery. Methods: We retrospectively obtained the clinical data of patients that underwent lumbar central decompression from July 2021 to June 2024. Patients were divided into two groups: the BESS group that underwent biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression, and the open surgery group that underwent open decompression. Both groups used unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression techniques. Total blood loss (TBL) using preoperative and postoperative change in hematocrit (Hct) was measured using Gross’s formula and the Nadler equation. Since TBL consists of VBL and HBL, HBL was calculated by subtracting the VBL measured intraoperatively from TBL. Results: A total of sixty-six patients in the BESS group and seventeen patients in the open surgery group were included in the study. The TBL was 247.16 ± 346.88 mL in the BESS group and 298.71 ± 256.65 mL in the open surgery group, without significant difference (p = 0.569). The calculated HBL values were 149.44 ± 344.08 mL in the BESS group and 171.42 ± 243.93 mL in the open surgery group. The HBL in the BESS group was lower than the HBL in the open surgery group, without significant difference (p = 0.764). Conclusions: The TBL and HBL during lumbar central decompression were smaller in patients who underwent BESS compared to those who underwent open surgery. While TBL was significantly lower in BESS, HBL did not show statistical significance between the two groups. HBL during BESS should not be neglected, and related hemodynamics should be considered postoperatively. Full article

Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has traditionally been employed for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Recent innovations in surgical methods and technologies have expanded its range to address other spinal pathologies, providing minimally invasive solutions with potential clinical benefits. Our review aims to summarize the applications, clinical outcomes, and limitations of ESS beyond LDH, focusing on its role in complex spinal conditions such as stenosis, thoracic disc herniation, spinal tumors, synovial cysts, and failed back surgery syndrome. A thorough review of the literature was conducted to assess and summarize the current evidence regarding ESS applications for spinal conditions beyond LDH surgery. Areas of focus included innovations in technology and technique, as well as comparisons with conventional open surgical methods. ESS shows notable potential across different spinal conditions by providing minimally invasive alternatives to traditional open surgery. Its use could be associated with reduced surgical morbidity, shorter recovery times, and improved patient outcomes. In particular, ESS is versatile in addressing both degenerative and neoplastic conditions of the spine. Despite this, challenges such as technical complexity, steep learning curves, and limited indications for certain pathologies remain as barriers to wider adoption. ESS is evolving in spine surgery, extending its utility beyond LDH surgery. While the current evidence largely supports its clinical efficacy, further studies are needed to address the present limitations and optimize its application. Future developments in surgical training and technology will likely enhance its adoption and broaden its clinical indications. Full article

Background and Objectives: Biportal endoscopic spine surgery (BESS) is a promising technique that can be applied for the treatment of various spinal diseases. However, traditional BESS procedures require multiple, separate incisions. We present, herein, various techniques to reduce the number of incisions in multi-level surgery and their clinical outcomes. Materials and Methods: Three different techniques were used to reduce the number of incisions for the preservation of normal tissue associated with BESS: the step-ladder technique, employing a common portal for the scope and instruments; the portal change technique employing a two-level procedure with two incisions; and the tilting technique, employing more than three levels. Pain (Visual Analog Scale), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), and patient satisfaction were evaluated before and 12 months after the procedure. Results: Among the 122 cases of multilevel spine surgery, 1.43 incisions per level were employed for multilevel BESS. Pain and disability showed significant improvement. Patient satisfaction showed favorable results. Conclusions: Combining multiple techniques during biportal surgery could decrease the number of incisions needed and preserve musculature with favorable clinical outcomes. Full article

Objective: In this systematic review, we summarized the indications for and outcomes of three main unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) approaches for the decompression of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). Methods: A comprehensive search of the literature was performed using Ovid Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid’s Cochrane Library. The following information was collected: surgical data; patients’ scores on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Macnab criteria; and surgical complications. Results: In total, 23 articles comprising 7 retrospective comparative studies, 2 prospective comparative studies, 12 retrospectives case series, and 2 randomized controlled trials were selected for quantitative analysis. The interlaminar approach for central and bilateral lateral recess stenoses, contralateral approach for isolated lateral recess stenosis, and paraspinal approach for foraminal stenosis were used in 16, 2, and 4 studies, respectively. In one study, both interlaminar and contralateral approaches were used. L4-5 was the most common level decompressed using the interlaminar and contralateral approaches, whereas L5-S1 was the most common level decompressed using the paraspinal approach. All three approaches provided favorable clinical outcomes at the final follow-up, with considerable improvements in patients’ VAS scores for leg pain (63.6–73.5%) and ODI scores (67.2–71%). The overall complication rate was <6%. Conclusions: The three approaches of UBE surgery are effective and safe for the decompression of various types of DLSS. In the future, long-term prospective studies and randomized control trials are warranted to explore this new technique further and to compare it with conventional surgical techniques. Full article

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) and percutaneous posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (PE) keyhole surgeries. Methods: Patients diagnosed with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR) treated by UBE or PE keyhole surgery from May 2017 to April 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The length of incision, fluoroscopic time, postoperative hospital stay, and total cost were compared. The clinical efficacy was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS), neck disability index (NDI), and modified MacNab criteria. Moreover, the C2-7 Cobb’s angle, range of motion (ROM), intervertebral height, vertebral horizontal displacement, and angular displacement of the surgical segment were measured. Results: A total of 154 patients were enrolled, including 89 patients in the UBE group and 65 patients in the PE group, with a follow-up period of 24–32 months. Compared with PE surgery, UBE surgery required shorter fluoroscopic times (6.76 ± 1.09 vs. 8.31 ± 1.10 s) and operation times (77.48 ± 17.37 vs. 84.92 ± 21.97 min) but led to higher total hospitalization costs and longer incisions. No significant differences were observed in the postoperative hospital stay, bleeding volume, VAS score, NDI score, effective rate, or complication rate between the UBE and PE groups. Both the C2-7 Cobb’s angle and ROM increased significantly after surgery, with no significant differences between groups. There were no significant differences between intervertebral height, vertebral horizontal displacement, and angular displacement of the surgical segment at different times. Conclusions: Both UBE and PE surgeries in the treatment of CSR were effective and similar after 24 months. The fluoroscopic and operation times of UBE were shorter than those of PE. Full article

Objective: The objective of this study was to introduce a surgical technique for the percutaneous decompression of cervical stenosis (CS) using a unilateral biportal endoscopic approach and characterize its early clinical and radiographic results. Materials and Methods: Nineteen consecutive patients with CS who needed surgical intervention were recruited. All enrolled patients underwent unilateral biportal endoscopic laminectomy (UBEL). All patients were followed postoperatively for >1 year. The preoperative and final follow-up evaluations included the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score for neurological assessment, visual analogue scale (VAS) for axial pain and C2–C7 Cobb angle for cervical sagittal alignment. The postoperative complications were analyzed. Results: Thirteen males and six females were included in the analysis. The mean follow-up period was 16.3 ± 2.6 months. The mean operative time was 82.6 ± 18.4 min. Postoperative MRI and CT revealed ideal neural decompression of the treated segments in all patients. Preoperative VAS and JOA scores improved significantly after the surgery, and cervical lordosis was preserved on the postoperative images. Conclusions: UBEL was an effective surgical method for CS, which may also minimize iatrogenic damage to the posterior tension band (PTB) and help to maximize the preservation of the cervical lordosis. Full article

Study Design: Case Series and Technical Note, Objective: UBS has been extensively used in open surgery. However, the use of UBS during UBESS has not been reported in the literature. The aim of this study was to describe a new spinal surgical technique using an ultrasonic bone scalpel (UBS) during unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery (UBESS) and to report the preliminary results of this technique. Methods: We enrolled patients diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent single-level UBESS. All patients were followed up for more than 12 months. A unilateral laminotomy was performed after bilateral decompression under endoscopy. We used the UBS system after direct visualization of the target for a bone cut. We evaluated the demographic characteristics, diagnosis, operative time, and estimated blood loss of the patients. Clinical outcomes included the visual analog scale (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the modified MacNab criteria, and postoperative complications. Results: A total of twenty patients (five males and fifteen females) were enrolled in this study. The mean follow-up period was 13.2 months (range 12–17 months). The VAS score, ODI, and modified MacNab criteria classification improved after the surgery. A minimal mean blood loss of 22.1 mL was noted during the operation. Only one patient experienced neuropraxia, which resolved within 2 weeks. There was no durotomy, iatrogenic pars fracture, or infection. Conclusions: In conclusion, our study represents the first report of the use of UBS during UBESS. Our findings demonstrate that this technique is safe and efficient, with improved clinical outcomes and minimal complications. These preliminary results warrant further investigation through larger clinical studies with longer follow-up periods to confirm the effectiveness of this technique in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Full article

The clinical and radiological results before and after surgery were compared and analyzed for patients with multilevel lumbar stenosis who underwent bi-portal endoscopic spine surgery (BESS) and microscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD). We retrospectively identified 47 and 49 patients who underwent BESS and microscopic ULBD, respectively, who were diagnosed with multi-level lumbar stenosis. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale score for both back and leg pain, and medication (pregabalin) use and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores for overall treatment outcomes were used pre-operatively and at the final follow-up. Radiological outcomes were evaluated as the percentage of dura expansion volume, and percentage preservation of both facets and both lateral recess angles. The follow-up period of patients was about 17.04 months in the BESS group and about 16.90 months in the microscopic ULBD group. The back and leg visual analog scale (VAS) scores and average pregabalin use decreased more significantly in the BESS group than in the microscopic ULBD group (each p-value 0.0443, <0.001, 0.0378). All radiological outcomes were significantly higher in the BESS group than in the ULBD group. The change in ODI in two-level spinal stenosis showed a significantly higher value in the BESS group compared to the microscopic ULBD group (p-value 0.0335). Multilevel decompression with the BESS technique in multiple spinal stenosis is an adequate technique as it shows better clinical and radiological results than microscopic ULBD during a short-term follow-up period. Full article

Unilateral biportal lumbar endoscopic interbody fusion is a relatively new technique in the field of minimally invasive spine surgery. It combines the benefits of preservation of the normal anatomy of the spine with direct visualization of the decompression of neural elements and endplate preparation for fusion. This results in high union rates and excellent outcomes for patients with back pain and lumbar spinal stenosis from spondylolisthesis while reducing the risk of injuries to the neural elements, endplate fractures and the theoretical rate of adjacent segment disease from disruption of the musculature. In this paper, we describe the steps and technical pearls pertaining to this technique and methods to avoid common pitfalls and complications. In conclusion, this technique would be a good tool in the armamentarium of a spinal surgeon specializing in minimally invasive spinal surgery. Full article

Background: Post-laminectomy syndrome is a common cause of dissatisfaction after endoscopic interlaminar approach. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of our two newly designed instruments for laminotomy, a dural protector attached to the scope and a knot pusher for water-tight suturing of the incidental dural tears. Material and Methods: This was a multicenter evaluation. Efficacy was quantified as the pre-to-postoperative improvement in pain (visual analog scale), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), patient satisfaction (modified MacNab score), and length of hospital stay. Safety was quantified by the incidence and location of dural tears, rate of revision, and radiological outcomes. Outcomes were evaluated between the control (before instrument development) and experimental (after instrument development) groups. Results: There was a significant improvement in leg pain in the experimental group (p = 0.03), with greater patient satisfaction in the control group (p < 0.01). There was no incidence of dural tears in the area of the traversing and exiting nerve roots in the experimental group. Water-tightness of sutures was confirmed radiologically. Conclusion: The novel dural protector and the knot pusher for water-tight sutures improved the efficacy and safety of decompression and discectomy; however, a prolonged operative time was a drawback. Full article