Clinical and Radiological Comparison of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic and Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Degenerative Disease
- PMID: 39854041
- PMCID: PMC11962286
- DOI: 10.1111/os.14361
Clinical and Radiological Comparison of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic and Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Degenerative Disease
Abstract
Objective: Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) is an emerging and minimally invasive surgeryfor lumbar spinal degenerative disease. However, the efficacy, safety and the radiological changes of dural sac and paraspinal muscle of UBE compared with the conventional percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) remains to be determined. The purpose of the study was to comprehensively compare the clinical efficacy between UBE and PTED in the surgical treatment of lumbar spinal degenerative disease.
Methods: The clinical and radiological data of patients who underwent single-segment endoscopic surgery for lumbar spinal degenerative disease in our hospital from January 2021 to June 2022 were collected in the retrospective study. The visual analogue score (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) before and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperative, changes of the cross-sectional area of the dural sac area and paraspinal muscles on axial T2-weighted MRI, operation time, intraoperative complications, MacNab criteria for evaluating efficacy at 12 months postoperatively, and recurrence rate of symptoms within 12 months were compared between patients undergoing PTED and UBE surgeries.
Results: A total of 142 patients were included. Among them 74 patients underwent PTED surgery, and 68 patients underwent UBE surgery. No statistically significant differences were identified between the groups in demographic variables. The average VAS and ODI scores in both groups showed significant improvement during the follow-up but without statistically significant difference between the groups. The average operation time in the PTED group was 74.82 ± 19.49 min shorter than the 81.36 ± 21.37 min in the UBE group, exhibiting no statistically significant difference. Although the incidence of complications and recurrence was lower in the UBE group (4.05% vs. 1.47%, p = 0.354; 4.05% vs. 1.47%, p = 0.354, respectively), these differences did not reach statistical significance. The dural sac area in the PTED group increased byan average of 43.16 ± 14.62 cm2, and it was 68.53 ± 16.42 cm2 in the UBE group. Despite the dural sac area increased in both groups, the UBE group had a statistically significant greater improvement than the PTED group (p = 0.000). The area of the paraspinal muscle in the UBE group was significantly greater postoperatively (34.54 ± 2.75 cm2 vs. 36.22 ± 2.96 cm2, p = 0.001) and significantly less than in the PTED group at 12 months postoperatively (31.17 ± 2.59 cm2 vs. 29.46 ± 3.11 cm2, p = 0.001).
Conclusion: Both PTED and UBE surgeries can achieve satisfactory improvement in symptoms and function for patients with lumbar spinal degenerative disease and can be well-maintained as a first-line minimally invasive treatment. However, the UBE technique can achieve a better decompression area to restore the normal shape of the dural sac but may lead to greater paraspinal muscle damage and atrophy.
Keywords: discectomy; lumbar spinal degenerative disease; minimally invasive; percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy; unilateral biportal endoscopic.
© 2025 The Author(s). Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Conflict of interest statement
All authors meet the authorship criteria according to the latest guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, and all authors are in agreement with the manuscript.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Figures



Similar articles
-
Clinical Efficacy of Biportal versus Uniportal Endoscopic Discectomy for Far Lateral Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Retrospective Study Analysis.World Neurosurg. 2025 May;197:123788. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2025.123788. Epub 2025 Mar 26. World Neurosurg. 2025. PMID: 39956372
-
Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes and muscle injury in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis undergoing arthroscopic-assisted uni-portal spinal surgery, unilateral biportal endoscopic surgery, and percutaneous interlaminar lumbar discectomy: a six-month follow-up.J Orthop Surg Res. 2025 Jul 21;20(1):684. doi: 10.1186/s13018-025-06088-1. J Orthop Surg Res. 2025. PMID: 40691813 Free PMC article.
-
[Effect and complication among different kinds of spinal endoscopic surgery for lumbar disc herniation].Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2024 Mar 25;37(3):228-34. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20220860. Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2024. PMID: 38515408 Chinese.
-
Comparison of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy with Other Surgical Technics: A Systemic Review of Indications and Outcomes of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy from the Current Literature.World Neurosurg. 2022 Dec;168:349-358. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.06.153. World Neurosurg. 2022. PMID: 36527214
-
Comparison of efficacy and safety between unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus uniportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024 Dec 19;25(1):1037. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-08146-x. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024. PMID: 39702176 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Research advances in unilateral endoscopic spinal surgery for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a review.J Orthop Surg Res. 2025 Jul 11;20(1):643. doi: 10.1186/s13018-025-06071-w. J Orthop Surg Res. 2025. PMID: 40646647 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Ma X. L., Zhao X. W., Ma J. X., Li F., Wang Y., and Lu B., “Effectiveness of Surgery Versus Conservative Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A System Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials,” International Journal of Surgery 44 (2017): 329–338, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.07.032. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Rathbone J., Rackham M., Nielsen D., et al., “A Systematic Review of Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF) Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF), transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF), posterolateral Lumbar Fusion (PLF),” European Spine Journal 32 (2023): 1911–1926, 10.1007/s00586-023-07567-x. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Chen Z., Zhang L., Dong J., et al., “Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy Compared With Microendoscopic Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: 1‐Year Results of an Ongoing Randomized Controlled Trial,” Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine 28 (2018): 300–310, 10.3171/2017.7.SPINE161434. - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical