ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
Clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic technique for adjacent segment pathology following lumbar fusion.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of clinical efficacy and minimal invasiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy in the treatment of calcified lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Efficacy comparison of arthroscopic-assisted uniportal spinal surgery and percutaneous endoscopic discectomy for adjacent segment lumbar disc herniation after fusion surgery.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
- Efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopy vs. percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar approach in lumbar disc herniation: A meta-analysis.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Article
- Early Outcomes of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Adjacent Segment Disease After Lumbar Fusion.Journal of pain research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLumbar fusion surgery can lead to adjacent segment pathology (ASP). The unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) technique has been shown to be effective in treating lumbar degenerative diseases. However, few studies have evaluated its use for ASP. This single-center, retrospective study aimed to evaluate the short-term clinical efficacy and safety of the UBE technique for treating ASP following lumbar fusion.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted involving 18 patients with ASP who met the established inclusion and exclusion criteria. All patients underwent the UBE technique and were followed for at least 6 months. In addition to UBE procedural parameters, patient-reported outcomes were assessed, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, and the modified MacNab criteria, both preoperatively and at follow-up. Radiological assessments included the dural sac enlargement ratio, extent of bony decompression, and facet joints preservation rate.
resultsThe mean follow-up duration was 15.94 months. Total blood loss averaged 273.03 ± 181.22 mL, and intraoperative hidden blood loss was 226.92 ± 178.12 mL. The mean operative time is 94.33 ± 27.09 min, and the average length of postoperative hospital stay was 3.56 ± 1.25 days. There were no neurological complications associated with the operation. The ODI, VAS scores for back and leg pain, and JOA scores improved significantly at the last follow-up, compared with preoperative values. Based on the modified Macnab criteria, 94.45% of patients reported excellent or good outcomes. Radiological evaluations showed no evidence of segmental instability at final follow-up.
conclusionThe UBE technique achieves satisfactory short-term clinical outcomes in patients with ASP following lumbar fusion without exacerbating spinal instability. This approach may be particularly beneficial for elderly patients with multiple comorbidities who are less tolerant of additional fusion surgery. However, further research is needed to evaluate its long-term efficacy and safety.
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.