Literature ReviewA Systematic Review of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery: Preliminary Clinical Results and Complications
Introduction
Traditionally, open discectomy and the decompression procedure have been the most common techniques for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and stenosis (without degenerative instability and spondylolisthesis).1, 2 Because they are minimally invasive spinal techniques, microscopic discectomy and decompression can reduce surgical trauma, reduce bleeding, and lead to quick recovery after surgery.3, 4 However, when a tubular approach is used in a microscopic setting, the ability to hand instruments might be restricted along with the vision. Percutaneous endoscopic surgery is one of the most common procedures for LDH and lumbar spinal stenosis. It is a minimally invasive procedure that includes a small incision, low blood loss, and early discharge.5, 6 Whether the transforaminal or the interlaminar approach is used, endoscopic spinal surgery is performed through a single portal involving light source, irrigation, visualization, and instrumentation. Despite use of a microscope or full-endoscope, visualization is restricted and there are also technical difficulties that may be encountered by surgeons, which are particularly relevant in severe stenosis or in cases in need of bilateral decompression.7, 8, 9, 10 Furthermore, surgeons need to be familiar with the full-endoscopic technique, which requires a steep learning curve. Unilateral biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (UBE), referred to with different names in reported studies, is the combination of integrated open and endoscopic spinal surgery, which can lessen the impact of the limitations.11, 12, 13
Although UBE has not yet become popular, it has attracted much interest. However, there is a lack of robust studies investigating the outcomes and efficacy of UBE. In this study, we review the literature and summarize the preliminary clinical outcomes and complications of this new technique in lumbar decompression surgery.
Section snippets
Search of Literature and Inclusion Criteria
This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.14
A PubMed search of the English literature was performed on July 1, 2018 using the terms “bi-portal endoscopic spinal surgery” OR “two portal endoscopic spinal surgery.” Two independent reviewers performed a review of the literature and manual checks through the reference lists for identification. We included only studies of lumbar spinal discectomy and
Study Selection
A total of 35 studies were identified through the database search. After a title and abstract screening that excluded 20 irrelevant studies, the 15 potentially relevant studies that remained were retrieved.11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 After a detailed investigation of the full text, 8 studies met the inclusion criteria. The 7 studies that were excluded comprised 2 studies of technical note,23, 24 2 studies combined with fusion surgery,26, 27 1 in a cervical
Discussion
The transforaminal and interlaminar approaches are the 2 most widely and commonly used routes in endoscopic spinal surgery. Transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) is advantageous for treating soft LDH, based on its small incision, rapid recovery, minimizing blood loss, preservation of posterior structures, direct fragmentectomy, and neural decompression, as well as its preservation of the central nucleus.30, 31, 32 However, there are disadvantages associated with the
Conclusions
The UBE technique for the treatment of LDH was different from conventional percutaneous endoscopic spinal surgery because of ligamentum flavum resection and bony resection. According to preliminary studies, there were similar results between UBE for the treatment of LDH and spinal stenosis, including operative time, length of stay in hospital, complication rate, and satisfaction rate. Existing studies, including some ongoing studies, are limited to small cohorts and a short-term follow-up;
References (37)
- et al.
Microendoscopic discectomy (MED) for lumbar disc prolapse
J Clin Neurosci
(2003) - et al.
Clinical comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic technique versus open microdiscectomy for single-level lumbar discectomy: a multicenter, retrospective analysis
J Orthop Surg Res
(2018) - et al.
Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression by 30° endoscopy in lumbar spinal stenosis: technical note and preliminary report
J Orthop
(2018) - et al.
Comparison of surgical invasiveness between microdiscectomy and 3 different endoscopic discectomy techniques for lumbar disc herniation
World Neurosurg
(2018) - et al.
Biportal endoscopic decompression of exiting and traversing nerve roots through a single interlaminar window by a contralateral approach: technical feasibilities and morphometric changes of the lumbar canal and foramen
World Neurosurg
(2018) - et al.
Bi-portal Arthroscopic Spinal Surgery (BASS) with 30° arthroscopy for far lateral approach of L5-S1–technical note
J Orthop
(2018) - et al.
Arthroscopic discectomy and interbody fusion of the thoracic spine: a report of ipsilateral 2-portal approach
Int J Spine Surg
(2012) Irrigation endoscopic decompressive laminotomy. A new endoscopic approach for spinal stenosis decompression
Spine J
(2015)- et al.
Translaminar lumbar epidural endoscopy: anatomy, technique, and indications
Arthroscopy
(1996) - et al.
Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse: updated Cochrane Review
Spine (Phila Pa 1976)
(2007)
Long-term outcomes of standard discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a follow-up study of more than 10 years
Spine (Phila Pa 1976)
Surgical complications of microendoscopic procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis
Minim Invasive Neurosurg
Outcomes after decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: comparison between minimally invasive unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression and open laminectomy: clinical article
J Neurosurg Spine
Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD)
Neurosurg Rev
Full-endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal lumbar discectomy versus conventional microsurgical technique: a prospective, randomized, controlled study
Spine (Phila Pa 1976)
Exiting root injury in transforaminal endoscopic discectomy: preoperative image considerations for safety
Eur Spine J
Assessment of the learning curve for lumbar microendoscopic discectomy
Neurosurgery
Percutaneous biportal endoscopic decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a technical note and preliminary clinical results
J Neurosurg Spine
Cited by (0)
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that the article content was composed in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.