Comparison of outcomes between unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy and percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy in single-level lumbar disc herniation

Purpose The clinical results of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) for the treatment of L4/L5 disc herniation were compared. Methods Patients with L4/L5 disc herniation who had either Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy (PTED; n = 53) or Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy (UBED; n = 69) at our facility during the same time period were the subject of a retrospective evaluation. Clinical outcomes, radiological information, and complications were collected and evaluated for each group. Results A retrospective analysis of 122 patients with L4/L5 disc herniation revealed that 69 of them received unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) and 53 got percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED). Leg pain ( P = 0.242) and low back pain ( P = 0.645) preoperative, postoperative day 1, and final follow-up VAS scores did not show any significant between-group differences. By the final follow-up, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were significantly improved for both groups ( P < 0.001). The UBED group's patient satisfaction rate was 95.7%, while the PTED group's was 94.0%, according to the modified MacNab criteria. The two groups did not differ statistically significantly ( P = 1). Similarly, radiological outcomes did not differ significantly between groups. Compared to the PTED group, patients in the UBED group experienced higher hemoglobin loss and longer hospital stays. On the other hand, intraoperative fluoroscopy exposures were dramatically decreased ( P < 0.01) by the UBED method. Conclusion Both UBED and PTED are effective and safe treatment options for L4/L5 disc herniation. UBED entailed less fluoroscopic exposure, and PTED contributed to less blood loss as well as a shorter hospital stay.