Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Mar 11:22:100603.
doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2025.100603. eCollection 2025 Jun.

Classification of endoscopic spine procedures

Affiliations

Classification of endoscopic spine procedures

Mazda Farshad et al. N Am Spine Soc J. .

Abstract

Background: A consensus on grading the complexity of endoscopic spinal procedures is lacking, but urgently needed to guide training, clinical practice, and regulatory concepts.

Methods: A 2-dimensional classification system was developed, considering both the technical and morphological parameters contributing to the complexity of endoscopic spine procedures. An international survey with 68 questions - including those on demographic data and surgical volumes, suitability of the proposed 2-dimensional classification system, and categories of techniques and morphologies - was completed by spine surgeons with endoscopic experience. A consensus was defined as a difference >/= 10% between the most frequently given grade and the second most given grade. In cases of no clear consensus (ie, agreement of less than 10%), an additional analysis considering only the responses from surgeons with experience of more than 500 endoscopic spine surgeries was performed.

Results: 115 survey entries were received, of which 112 were analyzed. The participating spine surgeons (64% orthopedic surgeons, 35% neurosurgeons, 1% other) originated from 27 countries and have performed an average of 509 endoscopic spine surgeries (55,984 total endoscopic procedures). 85.7% of the survey respondents agreed that the proposed 2-dimensional classification system was indeed appropriate for its particular purpose. Thus, a consensus classification system was born, allowing for grading simple procedures (eg, Ia for lumbar interlaminar discectomy of a soft disc herniation) to complex procedures (eg, IIIc for revision posterior endoscopic cervical central decompression).

Conclusions: A consensus of 112 endoscopic spine surgeons from 27 countries facilitated the development of a 2-dimensional classification system outlining the complexity of endoscopic spinal procedures, taking into account both technical aspects and morphological parameters. This classification system categorizes different endoscopic spine procedures and the pathologies they are employed to treat based on complexity, thus guiding the endoscopic spine community in medical training, patient education, and regulatory and reimbursement discussion.

Keywords: Classification; Complexity; Consensus; EndoSpine; Endoscopy; Nomenclature.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig. 1
Two-dimensional classification to grade the complexity of endoscopic spine surgery.
Fig 2
Fig. 2
Illustration of the technical procedures grouped according to their complexity from lowest difficulty (grade I) to highest complexity (grade III).
Fig 3
Fig. 3
Two-dimensional grading system for the complexity of endoscopic spine procedures with a graded list of technical procedures (vertical, y axis) and morphological parameters (horizontal, x axis).

References

    1. Chen K.-T., Kim J.-S., Huang A.P.-H., Lin M.H.-C., Chen C.-M. Current indications for spinal endoscopic surgery and potential for future expansion. Neurospine. 2023;20:33–42. doi: 10.14245/ns.2346190.095. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kotheeranurak V., Liawrungrueang W., Quillo-Olvera J., et al. Full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy approach selection: a systematic review and proposed algorithm. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2023;48:534–544. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004589. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kim J.-H., Kim Y.-J., Ryu K.-S., Kim J.-S. Comparison of the clinical and radiological outcomes of full-endoscopic laminotomy and conventional subtotal laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial. Glob Spine J. 2024;14:1760–1770. doi: 10.1177/21925682231155846. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kotheeranurak V., Tangdamrongtham T., Lin G.-X., et al. Comparison of full-endoscopic and tubular-based microscopic decompression in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc. 2023;32:2736–2747. doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-07678-5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Trathitephun W., Asawasaksakul A., Jaruwanneechai K., et al. Intraoperative management of iatrogenic durotomy in endoscopic spine surgery: a systematic review. Neurospine. 2024;21:756–766. doi: 10.14245/ns.2448346.173. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources