Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40316768›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Clinical comparison of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar vs. unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective study.

Long Xiao, Jianhong Zhou, Qin Zhong, Xiaobo Zhang, Xuefei Cao

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Analysis of risk factors for deep vein thrombosis after lumbar endoscopic single-segment decompression without fusion.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 · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Long XiaoDepartment of Orthopedics, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, 550000, PR China.
Jianhong ZhouDepartment of Orthopedics, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, 550000, PR China.
Qin ZhongClinical Medical Research Center, Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University, No.28 Beijing Road, Guiyang City, 550001, Guizhou Province, China.
Xiaobo ZhangDepartment of Orthopedics, Honghui Hospital, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Shaanxi, 710054, PR China. 845808289@qq.com.
Xuefei CaoDepartment of Orthopedics, Honghui Hospital, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Shaanxi, 710054, PR China. 695569686@qq.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study investigated the comparative effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) in managing lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Clinical data from 146 LDH patients treated surgically at the First Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (January 2020-January 2023) were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were categorized into UBED (n = 84) and PELD (n = 62) groups. Key metrics such as surgical time, incision length, fluoroscopy frequency, blood loss, hospital stay, complications, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were compared. The average age of patients in the UBED group was 53.46 ± 15.60 years, whereas the average age of patients in the PELD group was 55.61 ± 15.52 years (P = 0.411). Their BMI was 24.17 ± 2.94 and 23.90 ± 2.61, respectively (P = 0.558). The duration of symptoms was 10.52 ± 5.23 months in the UBED group and 11.66 ± 6.02 months in the PELD group (P = 0.225). The surgical time was 66.67 ± 15.83 min in the UBED group and 69.11 ± 25.84 min in the PELD group (P = 0.481). Intraoperative blood loss was 76.81 ± 26.74 ml in the UBED group and 69.44 ± 25.74 ml in the PELD group (P = 0.096). The hospital stay was 5.39 ± 1.83 days in the UBED group and 5.11 ± 3.42 days in the PELD group (P = 0.525). The average follow-up time was 16.46 ± 4.52 months in the UBED group and 15.71 ± 3.83 months in the PELD group (P = 0.289). Compared with those before the operation, the VAS score, JOA score, and ODI of both groups significantly improved on the first day postoperatively, at 3 months, and at 6 months. No significant intergroup differences were noted in terms of intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, or postoperative functional scores. Both groups showed marked postoperative improvements in functional outcomes. The postoperative satisfaction rates of patients in the UBED group and PELD group were 91.7% and 87.1%, respectively. Notably, the UBED group demonstrated a reduced fluoroscopy frequency and significantly lower rates of complications and recurrence. In terms of imaging, the disc Height of the two groups of patients showed a slight decrease after surgery, whereas the spinal canal area increased compared to before surgery, and there was no difference between the groups. UBED and PELD effectively alleviate LDH symptoms, but UBED has advantages in reducing fluoroscopy dependence, complications, and recurrence.

Indexed as

Diskectomy, PercutaneousEndoscopyIntervertebral Disc DisplacementLumbar VertebraeAdultAgedFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeLumbar disc herniation (LDH)Minimally invasive spine surgeryPercutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD)Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED)

Identifiers

PMID40316768
PMCPMC12048493

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.