ArticleAsian spine journal2025
The unilateral biportal endoscopy journey: proposing a 10-tier difficulty progression framework for unilateral biportal endoscopy.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early clinical outcomes of simultaneous biportal endoscopic decompression for tandem spinal stenosis: a single-center retrospective study.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Biportal endoscopic resection of thoracic schwannoma: surgical technique and strategies to overcome key challenges.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Article
- Editorial comment for the special issue on endoscopic spine surgery.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- Comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar fusion and modified minimally invasive tubular lumbar fusion for lumbar disc herniation: a two-year retrospective study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Biportal endoscopic spinal surgery for thoracic ossification of the ligamentum flavum: a study of different classification types and surgical outcomes.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) has revolutionized minimally invasive spinal surgery, offering enhanced visualization and reduced recovery times. However, the steep learning curve and technical complexity require a structured training framework. This narrative review proposes a 10-tier difficulty progression framework for UBE designed to guide novice surgeons through incremental skill acquisition. Each tier corresponds to specific procedures with escalating challenges spanning lumbar, cervical, and thoracic pathologies. The proposed framework begins with foundational lumbar procedures, such as ipsilateral recess decompression and discectomy, and advances to more intricate techniques, such as transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Transitioning to the cervical and thoracic regions requires mastery of earlier tiers, emphasizing precision in handling delicate anatomical structures. These challenges include achieving proficiency in mobilizing nerve roots, minimizing spinal cord manipulation, and mastering advanced decompression techniques. Evidence from learning curve analyses, including cumulative sum methodologies, underscores the importance of tailored training to reduce complications and optimize outcomes. By standardizing the progression of UBE procedures, this framework aims to enhance surgical safety, improve patient outcomes, and facilitate their widespread adoption. Future research should focus on validating this framework by using clinical trials, training feedback, and long-term patient data. Ultimately, this 10-tiered approach provides a roadmap for mastering UBE, addressing the growing demand for minimally invasive spinal surgery with precision and confidence.
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.