ArticleAsian spine journal2023
Comparison of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy Decompression and Microscopic Decompression Effectiveness in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Clinical efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopy for thoracic ossification of ligamentum flavum: A systematic review.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression for single-level degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Pooled it
- Learning curve insights in Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic (UBE) spinal procedures: proficiency cutoffs and the impact on efficiency and complications.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of paraspinal muscle changes after biportal endoscopic and microscopic lumbar discectomy or decompression.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Optimizing the mathematical model and technical standards for unilateral biportal endoscopic spinal surgery through machine learning-based video analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Comparison of biportal versus uniportal endoscopic decompression for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta‑analysis.Asian spine journal · 2026Review
- Comparative efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopy and micro-endoscopic discectomy in the treatment of elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Management of lumbar spinal epidural abscess using biportal endoscopic approach: a case series.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Case Report: Spinal epidural lipomatosis with incomplete cauda equina syndrome treated with unilateral biportal endoscopic technique.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Dural tear with severe irrigation-related complications during unilateral biportal endoscopy under general anesthesia: a case series and literature review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A retrospective study on the effects of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion on functional recovery in patients undergoing single-level lumbar interbody fusion.Translational neuroscience · 2026Article
- Arthroscopic-assisted uniportal spinal surgery for the treatment of rare T10/T11 thoracic disc herniation: a case report.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Targeted Decompression Under Local Anesthesia versus Extensive Decompression Under General Anesthesia for Octogenarians with Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Real-World Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Article
- Reporting bias is prevalent in systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to endoscopicJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Comparison of deep learning models for real-time neural tissue segmentation in spinal endoscopy.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Biportal endoscopic versus conventional open spine surgery for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta‑analysis.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Under Local Anesthesia in Elderly Patients with Medical Comorbidities.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
- Prediction of early postoperative complications and transfusion risk after lumbar spinal stenosis surgery in geriatric patients: machine learning approach based on comprehensive geriatric assessment.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Comparison of Hidden Blood Loss in Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery and Open Surgery in the Lumbar Spine: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Biportal Endoscopic Decompression with Maximized Facet Joint Preservation for Central to Extraforaminal Lumbar Stenosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) technique and microscopic decompression (MD) technique in lumbar spinal stenosis treatment. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and other databases were used to conduct extensive literature searches. RevMan ver. 5.3 software was used for the statistical analysis. Eleven studies were included with 930 patients, including 449 patients in the UBE group and 521 in the MD group. Both techniques revealed similar operative times at -1.77 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI], -7.59 to 4.05 minutes; p =0.55), the postoperative dural expansion area at -1.27 (95% CI, -19.30 to 16.77; p =0.89), the postoperative complications at 0.76 (95% CI, 0.47 to 1.22; p =0.26), the preoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for leg pain, and the last follow-up (>12 months) VAS for leg pain at -0.04 (95% CI, -0.14 to 0.06; p =0.47), the preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the last follow-up (>12 months) ODI scores at -0.18 (95% CI, -0.76 to 0.40; p =0.54), and patient satisfaction (the modified MacNab score) at 1.15 (95% CI, 0.54 to 2.42; p =0.72). However, intraoperative bleeding was lower following the UBE technique at -52.78 mL (95% CI, -93.47 to -12.08 mL; p =0.01) and was shorter following the UBE technique at -3.06 (95% CI, -3.84 to -2.28; p <0.01). UBE and MD technology have no significant differences in efficacy or safety in the treatment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis based on this meta-analysis. However, the UBE technique has less intraoperative bleeding and a shorter hospital stay. It has a slight advantage and is a better surgical option than the MD technique. It can be an alternative minimally invasive spinal surgery method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.