A Systematic Review of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery versus Uniportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery in Lumbar Canal Stenosis: Clinical Results and Complications

Abstract

Abstract Background Lumbar spinal stenosis is an important cause of pain and disability in the aging population. The true prevalence of symptomatic spinal stenosis is unknown because radiographic evidence of the condition does not always lead to clinical symptoms. Boden performed a cross-sectional analysis of MRI findings in a population of asymptomatic individuals and found that 30% to 90% of asymptomatic adults had a major spinal abnormality, including disc herniation, disc degeneration, and spinal stenosis. Objective To compare the clinical outcomes and complications of uniportal endoscopic spine decompression versus unilateral biportal endoscopic spine decompression in management of lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods This study was Randomized control trials, We included 197 patients from 3 studies; 92 in uniportal group and 105 in biportal. We compared VAS score for back pain and leg pain immediate postoperative and after 12 months. Results There was highly statistically significant difference found between the two studied groups regarding operative time (minutes) with p-value <0.003. That there was no statistically significant difference found between the two studied groups regarding complications as dural tears as well as length of hospital stay. Conclusion Our study show that Biportal and uniportal endoscopic spine surgery are both safe and effective technique in treating LSS as well as the new Biportal endoscopic technique proves to be superior method to shorten the operation time as well as learning curve. However, more randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes are needed to strengthen the demonstration of the current conclusions.