ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2026
Evaluating the advantages and limitations of three-dimensional (3D) endoscopy as an innovative tool in spine surgery for degenerative pathologies: a case series.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Endoscopic spine surgery reduces tissue damage, blood loss and postoperative pain. However, the two-dimensional (2D) view prevents depth perception and spatial orientation, contributing to a steep learning curve. Three-dimensional (3D) endoscopes improve depth perception but introduce increased scope diameter, workflow disruption and reduced image quality. A novel algorithm-based 3D visualisation system enables real-time conversion of standard 2D endoscopic images into 3D without requiring a dedicated 3D endoscope. Its impact on surgical workflow and intraoperative performance in spine surgery remains unknown. Case Description: 14 patients with degenerative spinal pathology underwent endoscopic surgery using a real-time 2D-to-3D conversion system (13 uniportal, 1 biportal). Outcomes were assessed across predefined domains: (I) visualisation; (II) instrument handling; (III) haemostasis; (IV) educational impact; (V) workflow; and (VI) ergonomics. Improved visualisation (depth perception and spatial orientation) were observed in all cases. Improved instrument handling (navigation and drill control) was observed in all decompression cases (10/10). Enhanced haemostasis recognition was reported in 6/10 applicable cases. Educational benefit was observed in 6/14 cases. Workflow disruption occurred in 4/14 cases and ergonomic symptoms (mild dizziness or double vision) were reported in 6/14 cases. Field of view was equivalent between 2D and 3D imaging. No dural injuries, neurological deficits or reoperations occurred. All patients demonstrated recovery consistent with expected postoperative trajectories. Conclusions: This case series demonstrates the potential for 3D endoscopy to be used as an adjunct in endoscopic spine surgery with improvements in depth perception, instrument handling and visualisation of spatial relationships without altering endoscope diameter or access corridors. While an initial familiarisation phase is required, the system demonstrates potential workflow and educational value. Further prospective studies with quantitative metrics and long-term outcomes are warranted.
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.