Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42321004›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2026

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy vs Percutaneous Interlaminar Endoscopic Discectomy for L5 to S1 Disc Herniation: A Prospective Comparative Study With Quasirandom Allocation.

Guanyi Liu, Zihui Yang, Qing Li, Bingke Zhu, Lihua Hu, Yang Wang, Fang Tian, Yong Hu, Miao Zhu

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Guanyi Liu *Department of Spine Surgery Center, Ningbo No. 6 Hospital, Ningbo, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-7626-7666
Zihui YangHealth Science Center, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China.
Qing LiDepartment of Endocrinology, Ningbo Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Ningbo, China. liqing877@126.com.
Bingke ZhuDepartment of Spine Surgery Center, Ningbo No. 6 Hospital, Ningbo, China.
Lihua HuDepartment of Orthopedics, The Quzhou Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Quzhou People's Hospital, Quzhou, China.
Yang WangDepartment of Spine Surgery Center, Ningbo No. 6 Hospital, Ningbo, China.
Fang TianDepartment of Medical Affairs, Ningbo No. 6 Hospital, Ningbo, China.
Yong HuDepartment of Spine Surgery Center, Ningbo No. 6 Hospital, Ningbo, China.
Miao Zhu *Department of Anesthesiology, Ningbo No. 6 Hospital, Ningbo, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the clinical efficacy and perioperative outcomes of percutaneous interlaminar endoscopic discectomy (PIED) and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) in treating L5 to S1 lumbar disc herniation.

methodsThis prospective comparative study with quasirandom allocation included 59 patients with diagnosed isolated L5 to S1 disc herniation who underwent either PIED (

resultsBoth PIED and UBED groups demonstrated significant postoperative improvements in lumbar and leg pain VAS scores and ODI scores (

conclusionBoth UBED and PIED are safe and effective techniques for treating L5 to S1 disc herniation. However, PIED is associated with shorter operative time, faster postoperative recovery, and less early postoperative lumbar pain. These findings support the preferential use of PIED in selected patients with isolated L5 to S1 disc herniation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides comparative evidence to guide surgical decision-making for L5-S1 disc herniation. The advantages of PIED-including reduced operative duration, accelerated recovery, and decreased early postoperative pain-may translate into improved patient satisfaction, reduced healthcare resource utilization, and earlier return to daily activities or work. Surgeons can consider PIED as a favorable minimally invasive option for appropriately selected patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2:

Indexed as

L5–S1lumbar disc herniationpercutaneous interlaminar endoscopic discectomyunilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy

Identifiers

PMID42321004
PMCPMC13393604

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.