Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery Research Articles

A novel repair strategy using knotless squeeze anchors for lumbar disc herniation with endplate junction lesions under biportal endoscopic spinal surgery.

Annulus fibrosus-endplate (AF-EP) junction lesions are important determinants for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Utilizing biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS), we introduce a novel repair method using bioabsorbable PushLock anchors with suture fibers to stretch disconnected AF tissues to the vertebral cortex. The viewing and working portals are established to excise herniated disc materials causing radiculopathy. Through the working portal, a suture strand is passed through the intact AF tissue near the lesion and retrieved using the Suture Crossing Device. Then, the knotless suture limbs are secured into the cortical bone socket of the vertebral body with a PushLock anchor. The procedure is a simple, safe, and feasible knotless suturing technique for the treatment of LDH with AF-EP junction lesions.

Is YouTube a Reliable and Quality Source on Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery? A Cross-Sectional Study

ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos focusing on Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic(UBE) spine surgery, a novel technique for spinal decompression in degenerative spinal disease. MethodsThis cross-sectional study, conducted in February 2023, involved an online search on YouTube using the term "unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery".Video popularity was assessed using the Video Power Index. Video reliability and quality were measured using the Global Quality Scale, the Journal of American Medical Association benchmark criteria, and the modified-DISCERN instrument. ResultsNinety-three videos were included for evaluation.Uploader profiles were categorised by continent, with 61.3% from Asia, 35.5% from the USA, 2.2% from Africa, and 1.1% from Australia. When comparing three groups as South Korea, USA, and other countries, no significant differences were observed in the technical characteristics of the videos.However, the educational quality and reliability of the videos were higher in those uploaded from South Korea (p<0.001).When the videos were divided into two groups according to their educational quality, significant difference were noted in video duration, loading time, video quality, and reliability(p<0.001). ConclusionsThe YouTube videos on UBE spine surgery showed high quality and reliability. However, videos from South Korea were found to have higher educational quality and reliability, while other specifications were similar for all videos. Furthermore, it was determined that videos uploaded more recently and with longer duration were of higher quality.

Learning curve of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery: a retrospective two-center study

OBJECTIVEBiportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) technique is a novel, useful and minimally invasive therapeutic strategy for lumbar degenerative diseases, which has advantages over other surgical techniques. However, the degree of technical difficulty in learning BESS is controversial and not well established. This study aims to determine the learning curve of BESS technique through cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. METHODSA total of 144 consecutive patients who underwent BESS with lumbar decompressive discectomy between 2017 and 2023 were included. A retrospective bi-center study was performed. RESULTSThree doctors with endoscopy experience employed the BESS technique for 51, 42 and 46 procedures, respectively. The CUSUM test of the three doctors showed adequate technical ability at the 45th, 41st and 44th operations respectively. Two doctors without endoscopy experience gave up further use of BESS technique due to technical difficulties after initial attempt. The overall complication rates of the three surgeons using the BESS technique were 3.92% (n = 2), 6.82% (n = 3), and 2.17% (n = 1), respectively. CONCLUSIONSOur study demonstrated that BESS is an effective treatment, and the learning curves of BESS for lumbar discectomy using CUSUM analysis were 41 ∼ 45 cases in trainees with endoscopic experience. Endoscopic experience contributes to the learning curve of the BESS technique.

Preliminary Outcomes of Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation Undergoing Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: A Single-Center Retrospective Study in Vietnam

Preliminary Outcomes of Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation Undergoing Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: A Single-Center Retrospective Study in Vietnam

Minimizing Tissue Injury and Incisions in Multilevel Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Technical Note and Preliminary Results.

Background and Objectives: Biportal endoscopic spine surgery (BESS) is a promising technique that can be applied for the treatment of various spinal diseases. However, traditional BESS procedures require multiple, separate incisions. We present, herein, various techniques to reduce the number of incisions in multi-level surgery and their clinical outcomes. Materials and Methods: Three different techniques were used to reduce the number of incisions for the preservation of normal tissue associated with BESS: the step-ladder technique, employing a common portal for the scope and instruments; the portal change technique employing a two-level procedure with two incisions; and the tilting technique, employing more than three levels. Pain (Visual Analog Scale), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), and patient satisfaction were evaluated before and 12 months after the procedure. Results: Among the 122 cases of multilevel spine surgery, 1.43 incisions per level were employed for multilevel BESS. Pain and disability showed significant improvement. Patient satisfaction showed favorable results. Conclusions: Combining multiple techniques during biportal surgery could decrease the number of incisions needed and preserve musculature with favorable clinical outcomes.

Comparison of Cervical Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Patients with Symptomatic Cervical Disc Herniation.

Background: We aimed to analyze the clinical outcomes and effectiveness of cervical biportal endoscopic spine surgery (C-BESS) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients with symptomatic cervical disc herniation. Methods: This study was a retrospective chart review of four-year clinical data involving 318 cases of symptomatic cervical disc herniation, with 156 patients undergoing the ACDF and 162 patients receiving the C-BESS. Preoperative and postoperative one-year data were collected. Results: The numeric rating scale and neck disability index showed statistically significant improvement for both ACDF and C-BESS groups. While showing a longer operation time and more blood loss during surgery compared to the ACDF group, the C-BESS group demonstrated a learning effect as the surgeon's proficiency increased with more cases. There was no significant difference in the postoperative length of hospitalization between the two methods. The subgroup with predominant arm pain revealed the statistical difference in arm pain intensity changes between the two groups (p < 0.001). The rates of complication were 2.6% for the ACDF group and 1.9% for the C-BESS group. Conclusions: C-BESS and ACDF are effective surgical treatments for patients with symptomatic single-level cervical disc herniation in relieving relevant pain intensities and pain-related disabilities.

Biportal endoscopic transforaminal thoracic interbody fusion for the treatment of thoracic myelopathy.

Biportal endoscopic spine surgery independently controls two hands, similar to microscopic surgery, and utilizes a broader working space that is not disturbed by retractors under clear-magnified endoscopic vision. These advantages facilitate successful neural decompression and safe transforaminal interbody fusion, even in patients with thoracic spondylotic myelopathy. A wide laminectomy and precise total facetectomy, in conjunction with partial pediculotomy, establish a secure transforaminal space for cage insertion. Endplate preparation and cage insertion were performed without retracting the spinal cord under direct endoscopic vision. Biportal endoscopic transforaminal thoracic interbody fusion can be a feasible technique for treating thoracic spondylotic myelopathy at the thoracolumbar junction levels.

Does the use of tranexamic acid intraoperatively reduce postoperative blood loss and complications following biportal endoscopic lumbosacral decompression?

Biportal endoscopic spine surgery is an effective minimally invasive technique for treating common lumbar pathologies. We aim to evaluate the impact of intraoperative tranexamic acid (TXA) use on postoperative blood loss in biportal endoscopic decompression surgery. Patients undergoing biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomies and decompressions either by same day surgery or overnight stay at a single institution beginning in October 2021 were prospectively enrolled. This study was non-randomized, non-blinded with the first cohort of consecutive patients receiving 1 g of intravenous TXA intra-operatively before closure and the second cohort of consecutive patients receiving no TXA. Exclusion criteria included any revision surgery, any surgery for the diagnosis of spinal instability, infection, tumor, or trauma, any contraindication for TXA. Eighty-four patients were included in the study, with 45 (54%) receiving TXA and 39 (46%) not receiving TXA. Median follow-up was 168 days [interquartile range (IQR), 85-368 days]. There were no differences in patient or surgical characteristics between cohorts. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was similar (P=0.20), while post-operative drain output was significantly lower in the TXA cohort (P=0.0028). Single level discectomies had significantly less drain output as compared to 2 level unilateral laminotomy, bilateral decompression (ULBD) cases (P<0.005). Post-operative complications were similar, with low rates of wound complication (1.2%) and transient postoperative weakness (2.4%, P>0.99 for both). Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back and VAS leg scores decreased significantly; the absolute decrease in scores did not differ between groups (P=0.71, 0.22, 0.86, respectively). Systemic intraoperative TXA administration is associated with a significant decrease in post-operative blood loss in biportal spinal endoscopy, with no impact on the improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) or rate of post-operative complications. Single level biportal discectomies had significantly less postoperative drainage with TXA and may not need drains postoperatively. Larger, randomized studies are necessary to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TXA use in biportal spinal endoscopy.

Effect of Thrombin-Containing Local Hemostatics on Postoperative Spinal Epidural Hematoma in Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery.

Retrospective case-control study. This study aimed to investigate the preventive effect of thrombin-containing local hemostatics (TCLH) on postoperative spinal epidural hematoma (POSEH) in biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS). This study compared the incidence of morphometric and symptomatic POSEH with or without TCLH in BESS. POSEH is reported not uncommon in BESS when compared with conventional spine surgery (CSS). TCLH achieves hemostasis with a high success rate in CSS. However, few studies have examined the effect of TCLH on BESS. Patients with and without TCLH were assigned to groups A and B, respectively. POSEH between the two groups was compared morphometrically and symptomatically. The risk factors for symptomatic and morphometric POSEH in BESS were identified. The morphometric POSEH was greater in group B, and the difference was significant (p =0.019). The incidence of symptomatic POSEH was lower in group A with 4.6% (5/109) than in group B with 9.5% (9/95); however, the rate was not significantly different (p =0.136). The morphometric POSEH was classified into two small (hG1 and hG2) and large (hG3 and hG4) and were compared between groups A and B, and the difference was significant (p =0.02). In the multivariable logistic regression, nonuse of TCLH (p =0.004) and preoperative diagnosis of stenosis (p =0.016) were variables found to be significant risk factors of morphometric POSEH. Severe compression of the thecal sac by POSEH is more common in patients without TCLH. The risk of hematoma formation was higher when bilateral decompression was needed and the cut bone surface was more exposed.

The Method of Portal Making in Lumbar Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Surgery with Different Operative Approaches According to the Constant Anatomical Landmarks of the Lumbar Spine: A Review of the Literature.

Review. Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE) is a minimally invasive surgery that is gaining recognition and being employed in clinical practice. Nevertheless, the precise method for determining UBE portals' location varies depending on the originator's preferences or the anatomical structure's proximity to the portal positions. Consequently, the relationship among UBE portals' locations is messy. This study aims to elaborate on the specific portal localization and explore the positional association and commonality among different UBE approaches' portals. The following keywords are used to search in the PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, Scopus, CNKI, and Wanfang database: "Biportal endoscopic spinal surgery", "Two portal endoscopic spinal surgery", "Percutaneous biportal endoscopic decompression", "Unilateral biportal endoscopy", "Irrigation endoscopic discectomy", "UBE" and "BESS". After screening, 29 pieces of literature are included. The study summarizes different UBE approach portal localizations, categorized by fusion or non-fusion surgery and pathological classification. The study presents an inaugural method for categorizing the lumber into four surgical intervals based on bone landmarks and assigns different UBE approaches to the appropriate intervals based on their characteristics, making the selection of UBE surgical approaches' portal locations more flexible. Additionally, the study provides an overview of the indications, complications, and distinct benefits associated with each interval, further refining the novel UBE portal interval localization method. The study clarifies the interrelationship and commonality between the portals of different UBE approaches and proposes a new UBE portal interval localization method to enhance surgeons' understanding and proficiency in UBE procedures.

Biportal endoscopic bone graft repair and percutaneous screw fixation for lumbar spondylolysis-technical note and clinical outcomes.

Lumbar spondylolysis involves a bony defect in the vertebral pars interarticularis, predominantly affecting the lower lumbar spine. This condition is a significant etiological factor in lumbar instability and recurrent lower back pain, particularly in young individuals. While conservative treatments are the primary intervention, they often fail to provide relief, necessitating surgical approaches. Notwithstanding, executing bone grafting and fixation in the pars interarticularis defect simultaneously through minimally invasive surgery remains challenging. This study elucidates the biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) technique, innovatively applied for bone graft repair and percutaneous cannulated screw fixation in a patient with lumbar spondylolysis. We offer a detailed walkthrough of the technical procedures supplemented with follow-up radiographic evidence. The BESS technique facilitated meticulous clearance of the defect site, coupled with bone grafting and cannulated screw fixation, effectively addressing lumbar spondylolysis through a minimally invasive approach. This method holds promise for achieving substantial osseous fusion at the vertebral pars interarticularis defect site. The BESS procedure for lumbar spondylolysis ensures a clean and prepared defect site for grafting and encourages successful osseous fusion, spotlighting its potential as a viable surgical strategy in managing this condition.

A narrative review of current and future of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic (UBE) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

With the ongoing development of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic (UBE) spine surgery, it has become standard of care at many centers across the globe for lumbar decompressions and discectomies due to minimal muscle damage, minimal postoperative back pain and early recovery. In UBE, the separation of viewing portal and working portal allows greater freedom of movement for the surgical instruments as the camera and instruments move independently providing unrestricted vision. Moreover, the continuous irrigation fluid pressure decreases bleeding and helps to irrigate out the bone debris. Hence, UBE spine surgery has become quite popular and has expanded its indications to lumbar spinal fusion. The adoption of UBE for conventional spine surgeons into their routine practice is relatively easier than uniportal endoscopy because of use of standard arthroscopic lenses, familiar view of anatomy, and use of conventional open spinal instruments. In this article, we review the current literature and discuss the indications, contraindications, clinical outcomes, complications and compare it with existing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Treatment Concept and Technical Considerations of Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

Decompression must be a major composure of surgical procedures for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. In addition to sufficient decompression for guarantee of relieving neurologic pain, compensating surgical instability after wider laminectomy and foraminotomy, and instrumentation with caging and fusion with grafting are performed for securing or restoring foraminal dimension, and correcting coronal/sagittal imbalance for expecting longer survival of adjacent segment. Endoscopic spinal surgery (ESS), full-endoscopic or biportal-, has been developed under a flag of successful decompression with preserving structural integrity as much as possible in helps of magnification and illumination, and gives a technical possibility and feasibility to solve LSS by decompression-alone. There come, recently, lots of endoscopic trials for overcoming conventional surgical treatment in need of wider dissection and escaping inevitable complications from surgical damage and compensating fusion technique. However, biportal-ESS till a recent era has been showing some technical limitations including clinical difficulties in accessibility for more moderate to severe stenosis and challenges for complicated conditions with segmental ventral slip, isthmic defect, stenosis combined with foraminal stenosis or foraminal disc rupture, or degenerative segmental scoliosis with disc height collapsing and endplate fatigue fracture. Because decompression-alone, itself, is just a skill for eliminating pathologies, and no protentional function of preserving degenerative structure young forever or stopping recurrency of disc degeneration or creeping subsidence foramen. The purpose of this review on clinical reports is to suggest potential possibility of Biportal-ESS for treating degenerative lumbar disorders by sufficient decompression, adequate elimination of various pathologies, and decreasing technical complications in deep considering of skillful tricks and trades, and in hope of being a basic skill for developing better innovative spinal surgical techniques in near future.

Abdominal Compartment Syndrome During Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery: A Case Report

Abdominal Compartment Syndrome During Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery: A Case Report

Overview and Prevention of Complications During Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Spine Surgery

Unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery (UBESS) is a minimally invasive surgical technique that has gained popularity for its potential benefits in various spinal lesions. It involves 2 small incisions, providing wide and clear endoscopic visualization, and causes less soft tissue damage than open surgery. UBESS offers flexibility and versatility in approaching different spinal disorders, including decompression of the spinal cord and root in the cervical or thoracic spine, as well as lumbar discectomy and spinal stenosis. One of the strengths of UBESS is its similarity to microscopic techniques, allowing for 2-handed endoscopic surgery. This familiarity makes it easier for surgeons to adopt endoscopic techniques and overcome the learning curve associated with spine endoscopy. However, some potential complications are associated with biportal endoscopic spine surgery, including dural tear, epidural hematoma, infection, incomplete surgery, and neural injury. Although the overall incidence of these complications is relatively low, it is important for clinicians to be aware of them and understand preventive methods.

Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Clinical Results for 163 Patients

Biportal endoscopy spine surgery is an endoscopic procedure that uses 2 portals, 1 for the endoscope and 1 for the instruments. It provides an excellent and very versatile field of view, with the advantage of another portal to approach the most common degenerative lumbar pathologies. We evaluated a retrospective series of patients who underwent biportal endoscopy with ≥1 year of follow-up. Relevant epidemiological and clinical data, such as the Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale for pain, were also considered. Complications and the effects of the learning curve are also discussed. We included 163 patients treated within a 5-year period with ≥1 year of follow-up available. The main pathologies were disc herniation (53.4%), foraminal stenosis (19%), and central canal stenosis (16.6%). The outcomes regarding disability and pain scores after surgery were very good, with a redistribution of the patient sample to the mild categories of disability. Inferential analysis showed relative and absolute improvements for both disc herniation and canal stenosis in terms of the Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale for pain, especially for disc herniation. The incidence of complications was approximately 7%. The most common approach was interlaminar (89%), and the most common pathology was disc herniation (54.9%). The duration of surgery overall and for the different stages had improved at the end of the learning curve with a reduction of almost 58 minutes. Biportal endoscopy is a minimally invasive procedure that is safe and effective, with a low rate of complications. It has a reproducible learning curve and provides very good outcomes regarding functionality and pain scores.

Complications in endoscopic spine surgery: a systematic review.

This systematic review aims to investigate the complication rate of endoscopic spine surgeries, stratifying them by technique, district and kind of procedure performed. This study was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. The literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Register, OTseeker and ScienceDirect database. Types of studies included were observational studies (cohort studies, case-control studies and case series) and randomised or quasi-randomised clinical with human subjects. No restrictions on publication year were applied. Repeated articles, reviews, expert's comments, congress abstracts, technical notes and articles not in English were excluded. Several data were extracted from the articles. In particular, data of perioperative (≤ 3 months) and late (> 3 months) complications were collected and grouped according to: (1) surgical technique [uniportal full-endoscopic spine surgery (UESS) or unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery (UBESS)]; (2) spinal district treated [cervical, thoracic or lumbar] and (3) type of procedure [discectomy/decompression or fusion]. Complication analysis was performed in subgroups with at least 100 patients to have clinically meaningful statistical validity. A total of 117 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of the 117 records included, 95 focused their research on UESS (14 LOE V, 33 LOE IV, 43 LOE III and five LOE II) and 23 on UBESS (three LOE V, eight LOE IV, 10 LOE III and two LOE II). A total of 20,020 patients were extracted to investigate the incidence of different perioperative and late complications, 10,405 for UESS and 9615 for UBESS. The present study summarises the complications reported in the literature for spinal endoscopic procedures. On the one hand, the most relevant described were perioperative complications (transient neurological deficit, dural tear and dysesthesia) that are especially meaningful for endoscopic discectomy and decompression. On the other hand, late complications, such as mechanical implant failure, are more common in endoscopic interbody fusion. I.

Biportal endoscopic surgery for lumbar spine herniated discs: a narrative review of its clinical application and outcomes.

Lumbar disk herniation (LDH) is a common condition affecting millions worldwide. The management of LDH has evolved over the years, with the development of newer surgical techniques that aim to provide better outcomes with minimal invasiveness. One promising emerging technique is biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS), which utilizes specialized endoscopic equipment to treat LDH through two small incisions. This review aims to assess the effectiveness of BESS as a management option for LDH by analyzing the available literature on surgical outcomes and potential complications associated with the technique. Our review shows that BESS is associated with favorable postoperative results as judged by clinical scoring systems, such as visual analog scale, Oswestry disability index, and MacNab criteria. BESS has several advantages over traditional open surgery, including minimized blood loss, a shorter duration of hospitalization, and an expedited healing process. However, the technique has limitations, such as a steep learning curve and practical challenges for surgeons. Our review offers recommendations for the optimal use of BESS in clinical practice, and provides a foundation for future research and development in this field, aiming to improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Overview and Prevention of Complications During Biportal Endoscopic Cervical Spine Surgery

Purpose: Biportal endoscopic spine surgery is becoming popular for various spinal pathologies, including cervical and thoracic spine diseases. However, the safety of biportal endoscopic cervical spine surgery (BECSS) has not been fully investigated, and inexperienced surgeons can cause serious complications. The study aimed to evaluate the complications of BECSS and identify tips for preventing them through a literature review and retrospective analysis of case series. Methods: Articles on BECSS were electronically retrieved from multiple databases, with inclusion criteria including controlled and case series designs, detailed reporting of complications and/or reoperations, and the use of BECSS. The study excluded simple review articles and case reports. The clinical data of 45 patients who underwent BECSS at our institution were collected, and information was extracted on demographic features, surgery type, surgical level, surgery-related complications, and reoperations and their reasons.Results: The study retrieved a total of 67 studies from 5 databases, of which 6 were included after screening. In total, 227 cases of BECSS were identified, and the overall complication rate was 0%–14.3%. Complications included dura tearing, symptom recurrence, incomplete decompression, postoperative epidural hematoma, and transient paralysis. Reoperation was performed in 3 cases.Conclusion: BECSS has similar complication rates to those of other surgical techniques. It is important to provide extensive education, share knowledge and experience, and conduct further research to minimize complications and improve outcomes for patients, as is the case with other spinal surgical procedures.

Efficacy of the erector spinae plane block with sedation for unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery and comparison with other anesthetic methods.

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a new regional anesthesia. Unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) spine surgery, a minimal invasive technique, has been performed under not only general anesthesia (GA) but regional anesthesia including spinal anesthesia (SA). The aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy of ESPB with sedation for UBE lumbar decompression and compare it with GA and SA. A retrospective age matched case-control study design was performed. Three groups (20 patients in each group) of patients who underwent UBE lumbar decompressions under each anesthetic method (GA, SA, or ESPB) were formed. The total anesthesia time excluding operation time, postoperative analgesia effects, hospital days, and complications related to anesthetic methods were evaluated. In the ESPB group, all the operations were performed without change of anesthetic methods and without anesthetic complications. But there were no anesthetic effects in the epidural space, which resulted in additional intravenous fentanyl usage. The mean of time from initiation of anesthesia to completion of surgical preparation was 23.3 ± 4.7min in the ESPB group, which was shorter than 32.3 ± 10.8min in the GA (p value = 0.001) or 33.3 ± 6.7min in the SA group (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients requiring first rescue analgesia within 30min was 30% in the ESPB group, which was lower than 85% in the GA (p < 0.001), but no significant different with 10% in the SA (p = 0.11). The mean of total hospital days in the ESPB was 3.0 ± 0.8, shorter than 3.7 ± 1.8 in the GA (p = 0.02) or 3.8 ± 1.1 in the SA group (p = 0.01). There was no case of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the ESBB even without prophylactic antiemesis. ESPB with sedation is a viable anesthetic option for UBE lumbar decompression.