ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2025
Comparison of Biportal Endoscopic Technique and Conventional Unilateral Laminectomy for Bilateral Decompression (ULBD) for Multi-Level Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Elderly People.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 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.
- Impact of mentorship on the learning curve of unilateral biportal endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis: a cumulative sum analysis across 2 generations of surgeons.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2026Article
- Biomechanical effects of endoscopic ULBD in a reduced‑stiffness lumbar spine model: focus on endplate stress and hypothesis‑generating risk indicators (a finite element analysis).Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Asymptomatic multisegmental epidural hematoma following unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2026Article
- Long-term comparative study of Open-TLIF, MIS-TLIF, and UBE-TLIF in single-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.European journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Clinical and radiological predictors of adverse outcomes after unilateral biportal endoscopic surgery for short-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of Biportal Endoscopic Technique and Conventional Unilateral Laminectomy for Bilateral Decompression (ULBD) for Multi-Level Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Elderly People.Orthopaedic surgery · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe object of this retrospective study was to compare the clinical, radiological, and spinal stability outcomes of biportal endoscopic Unilateral Laminectomy for Bilateral Decompression (BE-ULBD) and traditional Unilateral Laminectomy for Bilateral Decompression (ULBD) for multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients with osteoporosis.
methodsWe retrospectively identified 41 and 47 patients who underwent BE-ULBD and ULBD, respectively, who were diagnosed with multi-level lumbar stenosis and underwent double-segmental surgery in elderly patients. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS) score for both back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire score during the two-year follow-up. The radiological changes of cross-sectional dural area (DCSA), facet joint preservation rate (PFJR) and cross-sectional fat infiltration ratio (FI) on the surgical side were evaluated by MRI before and after operation. At 2 years after operation, progressive spondylolisthesis and instability were evaluated in the X-ray of the lumbar spine.
resultsAfter 24 months of follow-up, the VAS scores for both back and leg pain, ODI, and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire in both groups were recovered compared to pre-operation. The postoperative VAS score for lower back pain in the BE-ULBD group was lower than in the ULBD group (1.00 ± 0.95 vs. 1.91 ± 1.07, p < 0.001), and the postoperative VAS score for lower limbs was similar (0.49 ± 0.51 vs. 0.46 ± 0.72, p < 0.001). The postoperative ODI score was lower than that of the ULBD group (9.05 ± 5.01 vs. 12.09 ± 6.18, p < 0.001), and the postoperative ZCQ score of the BE-ULBD group was lower than that of the ULBD group (10.59 ± 2.18 vs. 8.85 ± 1.59, p < 0.001; 7.00 ± 1.12 vs. 7.87 ± 1.63, p = 0.012; 8.95 ± 2.11 vs. 10.74 ± 2.47, p < 0.001). In terms of radiological evaluation, the DCSA of patients in both groups was effectively improved after surgery. Compared with the ULBD group, the BE-ULBD group had a tiny improvement in DCSA (195.04 ± 34.54 vs. 180.93 ± 31.07, p = 0.048) and a better FI (43.48 ± 10.24 vs. 53.93 ± 7.62, p < 0.001). The PFJR was higher (85.90 ± 4.03 vs. 81.26 ± 4.56, p < 0.001) in the BE-ULBD group. Two years after surgery, fewer patients in the BE-ULBD group had spondylolisthesis than in the ULBD group (1/41 vs. 7/46, p = 0.043). The results of complications were similar between the two groups.
conclusionBE-ULBD is a safe and effective technique for multilevel decompression surgery in elderly patients, which can better protect spinal stability and has better long-term follow-up than traditional surgery.
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.