ReviewBrain & spine2025
Full-endoscopic spine surgery for intradural pathologies: A systematic review of innovations, challenges, and future prospects.
Review in Brain & spine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
Introduction: Full-endoscopic spinal surgery (monoportal endoscopy) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative for managing intradural spinal pathologies, offering reduced morbidity and accelerated recovery compared to conventional techniques. Research question: What is the current evidence on the effectiveness, limitations, and future prospects of full-endoscopic spinal surgery for intradural pathologies? Material and methods: A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted. Electronic databases (Cochrane, OVID-MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus) were searched for studies published from 2000 to 2024. Studies on full-endoscopic intradural spine surgery, including clinical trials, comparative studies, case reports, and meta-analyses in English, were included. Exclusion criteria involved non-intradural pathologies, biportal techniques, animal studies, and non-English publications. Narrative synthesis was performed due to study heterogeneity. Results: Thirty studies were reviewed. Full-endoscopic techniques effectively managed conditions such as tethered cord syndrome, spinal arachnoid cysts, intradural extramedullary tumors, Chiari malformation, and select vascular and inflammatory conditions. Benefits included minimal tissue disruption, improved visualization, shorter hospital stays, and reduced complications. Key challenges identified were intraoperative bleeding control, reliable dural closure, and irrigation-related complications like increased intracranial pressure. Discussion and conclusion: Full-endoscopic spine surgery demonstrates substantial clinical promise for intradural spinal conditions, significantly reducing morbidity and enhancing recovery. However, addressing current technical challenges is essential. Ongoing technological advancements in imaging, neuronavigation, and robotic-assisted systems, combined with future clinical trials, will be critical for expanding indications and confirming long-term efficacy.
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.