ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Unilateral biportal endoscopy versus percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for far lateral disc herniation: a comparative study of clinical efficacy and learning curves.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the clinical outcomes and learning curves of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) in the treatment of far lateral lumbar disc herniation (FLLDH).
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 122 patients with FLLDH who underwent spinal endoscopic surgery between January 2022 and July 2024, including 62 cases in the PELD group and 60 cases in the UBE group. All procedures were performed by the same minimally invasive spine surgery team. Perioperative parameters (operative time, intraoperative blood loss, foraminal area, postoperative hospital stay, total cost), visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified Macnab criteria were compared. Learning curves were analyzed using cumulative sum (CUSUM) with operative time as the core variable. All patients were followed for at least 12 months.
resultsBoth groups achieved significant improvement in pain and functional outcomes after surgery. Operative time was significantly longer in the UBE group than in the PELD group (132.77 ± 27.55 min vs. 86.61 ± 24.52 min), and total blood loss was also higher (270.43 ± 119.44 ml vs. 37.32 ± 13.69 ml). The PELD group showed lower postoperative day-1 back pain scores, whereas long-term VAS, ODI, and modified Macnab outcomes were comparable between groups. The excellent/good rates were 91.9% in the PELD group and 93.3% in the UBE group. CUSUM analysis demonstrated learning curve inflection points at 24 cases for UBE and 38 cases for PELD.
conclusionBoth UBE and PELD are safe and effective for treating FLLDH. PELD offers advantages in perioperative minimally invasive characteristics and cost-efficacy, whereas UBE features a shorter learning curve, facilitating more rapid surgical mastery.
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.