Comparison of Microscopic Decompression and Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery in the Treatment of Lumbar Canal Stenosis and Herniated Disc: A One-year Follow-up

Abstract

Backgrounds. Microscopic decompression (MD) has been widely used as an alternative to open decompression. Lately, biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) - a new approach in minimal-invasive spinal surgery – has also been used with good results. Although both groups can achieve adequate lumbar decompression, there is still a lack of evidence regarding their comparison. We aim to compare the outcomes of both techniques in a one-year follow-up.
 Methods. This is a retrospective study in 100 consecutive patients with symptomatic lumbar spine compression due to herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP) and lumbar canal stenosis (LCS) that was treated by either BESS or MD. Clinical evaluations using Visual Analog Score (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and SF-36 questionnaire were obtained. Objective data such as surgery duration, amount of postoperative drain production, and hospital length of stay were collected. Complications were noted throughout the follow-up time.
 Results. The BESS group had a significantly lesser surgical duration, drain production, and length of stay. At one year follow-up, both groups achieved significant improvement in VAS, ODI, and SF-36 compared to the preoperative condition. Complications were not observed in the BESS group.
 Conclusions. Both procedures were comparably effective to treat lumbar stenosis. Although this study shows superiority with BESS technique in immediate and long-term follow-up, the final choice may depend on the surgeon's preference