ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of learning curves and clinical efficacy of two endoscopic techniques for single segment lumbar degenerative disease.
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 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.
- Indirect Decompression Using the Keyhole Transfacet Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Note and Preliminary Clinical Application.International journal of spine surgery · 2026Article
- How many cases to proficiency? A systematic review of the learning curve in endoscopic lumbar interbody 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 · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To compare the clinical outcomes and learning curve characteristics of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) and percutaneous uniportal full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) in patients with single-segment lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD). A retrospective study was conducted from January 2022 to July 2023, involving a total of 95 patients with single-segment LDD, who were divided into two groups: the Endo-TLIF group and the UBE-TLIF group. The demographic characteristics, radiographic and clinical outcomes, as well as complications were meticulously recorded and analyzed in both groups. The mean operation time of Endo-TLIF group was 224.08 ± 58.90 min, which was significantly longer than that of UBE-TLIF group (169.93 ± 30.86 min) (P < 0.05). The perspective times were significantly shortened in the UBE-TLIF group compared with the Endo-TLIF group (P < 0.05). The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores showed significant improvement post-operation in both groups (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in VAS, ODI and modified Macnab criteria during the last follow-up periods (P > 0.05). Both groups exhibited similar complication rates and fusion rates (P > 0.05). CUSUM analysis indicated that the stabilization of operation time occurred after 23 cases for Endo-TLIF and 19 cases for UBE-TLIF, respectively. The safety and efficacy of both Endo-TLIF and UBE-TLIF for the treatment of LDD have been demonstrated. As the number of surgeries increased, the operation time for both procedures decreased. Specifically, after 23 surgeries, the operation time for Endo-TLIF reached a relative stability, while for UBE-TLIF it was achieved after 19 surgeries.
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.