ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar fusion and modified minimally invasive tubular lumbar fusion for lumbar disc herniation: a two-year retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Perioperative and 6-month outcomes of UNSES versus UBE for lumbar disc herniation with standardized annular suture.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the medium- and long-term clinical outcomes of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Fusion (UBE-TLIF) and Modified Minimally Invasive Tubular Lumbar Fusion (MIS-TLIF) for treating Lumbar Disc Herniation (LDH). Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 86 patients with single-level LDH who underwent surgery between August 2022 and August 2023. Patients were allocated to two groups: 42 underwent UBE-TLIF and 44 underwent MIS-TLIF. We recorded operative time, postoperative drainage volume, and complication rates. Pain and functional recovery were assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) preoperatively and at 3 days, 1, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Surgical outcomes were evaluated at 12 months using the MacNab criteria. Results: The mean operative time was significantly longer in the UBE-TLIF group than in the MIS-TLIF group (140.42 ± 16.02 min vs. 92.15 ± 13.14 min, Conclusion: Both UBE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF demonstrate comparable medium- and long-term clinical efficacy for LDH. UBE-TLIF is associated with less postoperative drainage and significantly better early pain relief, suggesting less soft tissue trauma. However, it was linked to a longer operative time in this study.
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.