Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Other Publications
    • ijss

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
International Journal of Spine Surgery
  • My alerts
International Journal of Spine Surgery

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Follow ijss on Twitter
  • Visit ijss on Facebook
Research ArticleMusings From the Masters

Riding the Wave of Innovation: Endoscopic Spine Surgery Is Here to Stay

Christoph P. Hofstetter
International Journal of Spine Surgery June 2023, 17 (3) 333-334; DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/8456
Christoph P. Hofstetter
1 Department of Neurological Surgery, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: chh9045@uw.edu
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Since the early days of surgical practice, surgeons have strived to achieve surgical goals while minimizing approach-related damage to adjacent tissues. The adaptation of endoscopy has played a critical role in miniaturizing access corridors in various surgical fields and contributed significantly to improved functional outcomes and decreased operative morbidity. In many procedures, such as cholecystectomies and joint surgeries, endoscopic approaches are now considered the standard of care.

Endoscopic techniques in spine surgery have encountered numerous obstacles and setbacks during their development. Despite the initial demonstration of feasibility by Kambin and Hijikata 50 years ago,1,2 the widespread adoption of endoscopic spine surgery was initially impeded by inadequate visualization, illumination, and the absence of tissue ablation technologies. However, advancements over the past 5 decades have addressed these challenges. The introduction of high-definition digital cameras and efficient LED illumination has significantly improved the visualization of the surgical field. Additionally, modern high-speed burrs allow for efficient bone resection and decompression of neural elements. Furthermore, specialized radiofrequency tools provide efficient hemostasis and dissection of neural tissues. Also, the development of frameless stereotactic navigation has flattened the learning curve and expanded the range of indications for endoscopic spine surgery. These notable advancements have played a pivotal role in enabling full-endoscopic spine surgery to expose and visualize principal anatomic landmarks used in conventional procedures, marking a paradigm shift.3

The establishment of defined principal anatomical landmarks for each full-endoscopic procedure has concluded the ages of “believing” in the endoscopic technique. Furthermore, this standardization allows for more effective teaching and encourages rigorous scientific investigation of surgical outcomes.

Through a worldwide effort, endoscopic spine surgeons have standardized full-endoscopic procedures with respect to target areas, principal anatomical landmarks, and nomenclature.4 Several prospective randomized controlled trials have shown the noninferiority of full-endoscopic spine surgery compared with traditional surgery.5–7 Pooled data from 6 randomized controlled trials suggest that full-endoscopic spine surgery reduces the rate of perioperative complications by half compared with traditional surgery.8 Impressively, the full-endoscopic technique decreases the rate of surgical wound infections 16-fold compared with the conventional technique.9 Despite all of this, the rate of adoption spinal endoscopy in the United States is far behind the rest of the world.10 Why? During a recent national meeting, I heard a prominent spine surgeon voice his concern that endoscopic spine surgery is too difficult to perform to gain wider traction. This was somewhat surprising to hear from a member of a medical field that typically does not shy away from risks or difficulties.

I suspect that the reasons behind the slow adoption of full-endoscopic spine surgery in the United States are primarily linked to the complexity of the health care system and its inability to support the implementation of novel, less morbid spinal procedures. First, teaching hospitals with high overhead costs often prioritize complex surgeries with substantial profit margins. At the same time, smaller noninstrumented procedures are moved to satellite hospitals with minimal teaching. This neglects the true mission of academic institutions to train the next generation of skilled surgeons in all aspects of spine surgery. Instead, our trainees gain the greatest exposure to the most aggressive and invasive spine procedures. Second, full-endoscopic surgery requires acquisition of capital equipment, which is often opposed by hospital administrators—although this opposition tends to dissolve quickly when the administrators themselves or their close ones require such care. Last, despite the additional training and increased surgical skills necessary, endoscopic spine surgery does not provide any financial rewards for the surgeon—in fact, it is quite the opposite, with insurances commonly rejecting full-endoscopic spine surgeries as “experimental.”

Despite these obstacles, an increasing number of spine surgeons in the United States perform full-endoscopic surgeries. A growing body of excellent clinical research supports the benefits of this novel innovative surgical technique. We recently initiated a multicenter endscopic spine research group (ESRG) to aprovide benchmark outcomes and allow for quality improvement initiatives. Considering the ambulatory nature of the procedures and their minimal complication rates, this technology is highly suitable for the development of innovative postoperative care through virtual smartphone applications.11 Moreover, surgical ingenuity continues to drive the development of new applications for technology, ultimately enhancing patient care. Patients themselves are becoming more organized and actively requesting full-endoscopic spine procedures. Although the field is still in its infancy, further innovation in surgical tools, adjunct technology, and advanced perioperative care are expected to propel its advancement even further.

Footnotes

  • Funding The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

  • Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author reports no conflicts of interest or financial disclosures with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

  • Disclosures Dr. Hofstetter is a consultant for Globus, Innovasis, and Joimax. He also teaches for AOSpine and Espinea.

  • This manuscript is generously published free of charge by ISASS, the International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery. Copyright © 2023 ISASS. To see more or order reprints or permissions, see http://ijssurgery.com.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Kambin P
    . Arthroscopic mcrodiscectomy: minimal intervention spinal surgery. Baltimore: Urban&Schwarzenberg; 1990.
  2. 2.↵
    1. Hijikata S ,
    2. Yamagishi M ,
    3. Nakayma T
    . Percutaneous discectomy: a new treatment method for lumbar disc herniation. Todenhosp. 1975;5:5–13.
    OpenUrl
  3. 3.↵
    1. Hofstetter CP ,
    2. Ruetten S ,
    3. Zhou Y ,
    4. Wang MY
    . Atlas of full-endoscopic spine surgery. Atlas of Full-Endoscopic Spine Surgery. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2020. http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/b-006-161148. doi:10.1055/b-006-161148
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    1. Hofstetter CP ,
    2. Ahn Y ,
    3. Choi G , et al
    . Aospine consensus paper on nomenclature for working-channel endoscopic spinal procedures. Global Spine J. 2020;10(2 Suppl):111S–121S. doi:10.1177/2192568219887364
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. 5.↵
    1. Gadjradj PS ,
    2. Rubinstein SM ,
    3. Peul WC , et al
    . Full endoscopic versus open discectomy for sciatica: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. BMJ. 2022;376:e065846. doi:10.1136/bmj-2021-065846
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Ruetten S ,
    2. Komp M ,
    3. Merk H ,
    4. Godolias G
    . Full-endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal lumbar discectomy versus conventional microsurgical technique: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33(9):931–939. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e31816c8af7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Gibson JNA ,
    2. Subramanian AS ,
    3. Scott CEH
    . Erratum to: a randomised controlled trial of transforaminal endoscopic discectomy vs microdiscectomy. Eur Spine J. 2017;26(8):2222. doi:10.1007/s00586-017-5112-9
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    1. Yang C-C ,
    2. Chen C-M ,
    3. Lin M-C , et al
    . Complications of full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy versus open lumbar microdiscectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurg. 2022;168:333–348. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2022.06.023
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  9. 9.↵
    1. Mahan MA ,
    2. Prasse T ,
    3. Kim RB , et al
    . Full-endoscopic spine surgery diminishes surgical site infections - a propensity score-matched analysis. Spine J. 2023;23(5):695–702. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2023.01.009
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. 10.↵
    1. Lin G-X ,
    2. Kotheeranurak V ,
    3. Mahatthanatrakul A , et al
    . Worldwide research productivity in the field of full-endoscopic spine surgery: a bibliometric study. Eur Spine J. 2020;29(1):153–160. doi:10.1007/s00586-019-06171-2
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. 11.↵
    1. Prasse T ,
    2. Yap N ,
    3. Sivakanthan S , et al
    . Remote patient monitoring following full endoscopic spine surgery: feasibility and patient satisfaction. J Neurosurg. 2023:1–10. doi:10.3171/2023.2.SPINE23136
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

International Journal of Spine Surgery
Vol. 17, Issue 3
1 Jun 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on International Journal of Spine Surgery.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Riding the Wave of Innovation: Endoscopic Spine Surgery Is Here to Stay
(Your Name) has sent you a message from International Journal of Spine Surgery
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the International Journal of Spine Surgery web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Riding the Wave of Innovation: Endoscopic Spine Surgery Is Here to Stay
Christoph P. Hofstetter
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jun 2023, 17 (3) 333-334; DOI: 10.14444/8456

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Riding the Wave of Innovation: Endoscopic Spine Surgery Is Here to Stay
Christoph P. Hofstetter
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jun 2023, 17 (3) 333-334; DOI: 10.14444/8456
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • The Role of ISASS in Evolving the Spine Code Landscape: Lumbar Discogenic Pain Receives Specific ICD-10-CM Code
  • Navigating the Future of Spine Surgery: A Surgeon’s Reflection on Coding, Reimbursement, and Emerging Technologies
  • Cervical Arthroplasty Complications and Complication Avoidance
Show more Musings From the Masters

Similar Articles

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Content
  • Archive

More Information

  • About IJSS
  • About ISASS
  • Privacy Policy

More

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Feedback

Other Services

  • Author Instructions
  • Join ISASS
  • Reprints & Permissions

© 2025 International Journal of Spine Surgery

International Journal of Spine Surgery Online ISSN: 2211-4599

Powered by HighWire