Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 30, 2025
Author Spotlight: Scope of LE-ULBD as a Safe, Effective, and Minimally Invasive Approach to Treat Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
Published on: February 9, 2024
Long-Term Functional Outcomes of Endoscopic Decompression with Destandau Technique for Lumbar Canal Stenosis
Saransh Gupta1, Nandan Marathe1, Harvinder Singh Chhabra1
1Department of Spine Service, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre, New Delhi, India.
Study Design:
Retrospective study of patients with lumbar canal stenosis (LCS) operated using endoscopic unilateral laminotomy with bilateral decompression (ULBD).
Purpose:
This study aimed to provide a detailed description of the technique of endoscopic decompression in LCS along with a description of the surgical anatomy and its advantages. We also discuss the clinical outcomes in patients operated using this technique.
Overview Of Literature:
In 1999, the results with the use of microscopic ULBD were published. Microscopic/microendoscopic decompression using tubular retractor system showed good to excellent results in studies that compared such techniques with midline decompression. The first description of the use of endoscope in spine surgery was in 1988 when it was used for discectomy. With advancements and familiarity with the techniques, full endoscopic surgery has found application in LCS treatment.
Methods:
The clinical records of 953 patients who were operated between 1998 and 2008 were analyzed in 2018. Along with patient characteristics, information about return to daily activities, complication rates, and functional outcomes using Prolo score was assessed.
Results:
L4-L5 was the most common level for which surgery was performed. Two-level decompression was performed in 116 patients; 89.5% patients were able to return to their daily activities after 2 weeks. Functional outcomes as per the Prolo score were reported by patients as excellent, good, and poor in 89.85%, 1.59%, and 8.55%, respectively. Repeat surgery was required at same level in 16 patients and at a different level in 21 patients. Total 605 patients (63.49%) were symptom-free during the 70-month followup, while 344 complained of residual back pain, and four complained of persistent leg pain.
Conclusions:
ULBD using the Endospine system achieves adequate decompression in most cases and is a good alternative to open laminectomy, with the advantage of avoiding damage to the structural integrity of the spine and preserving soft tissue attachments.
