Case series reports favorable outcomes in surgical efficacy and functional improvement for lumbar conditions, suggesting biportal techniques may minimize incisions.
Objective: Endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion is a novel yet safe approach that provides a clear and expansive endoscopic view, facilitating the preservation of spinal structures. Whether biportal or uniportal incisions should be made for endoscopic interbody fusion is unclear. This study evaluated surgical efficacy and functional outcomes following biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (BE-TLIF) with pedicle screw incisions for the treatment of lumbar spinal pathologies.Methods: Patients who underwent BE-TLIF between October 2019 and June 2023 with a minimum 12-month follow-up were retrospectively included. Functional outcomes were assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQoL-5 Dimensions VAS (EQ5D-VAS), and modified MacNab criteria. Interbody fusion and cage subsidence rates were evaluated using lumbar x-rays.Results: In total, 21 patients (7 men and 14 women) with a mean age of 69.9 years (range, 41–90 years) were included, covering 23 total surgical levels. Compared to their preoperative values, 12-month postoperative mean back and leg VAS and ODI scores were significantly lower (back VAS, 3.3–0.9, p<0.001; leg VAS, 3.4–1.8, p<0.001; ODI, 18–2, p=0.049). In contrast, the EQ5D-VAS scores were significantly higher (79.8–98.2, p=0.009). Most patients (90%) achieved good or excellent modified MacNab criteria outcomes at the 12-month follow-up, and no serious complications were reported. The overall fusion and subsidence rates at 12 months were 87% and 13%, respectively.Conclusion: BE-TLIF via pedicle screw incision provides favorable clinical outcomes, minimizes skin incisions, and is a feasible treatment option for lumbar spine pathologies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Su et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: