Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 27, 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
Full Endoscopic Lumbar Stenosis Decompression: A Future Gold Standard in Managing Degenerative Lumbar Canal Stenosis
Asrafi Rizki Gatam1,2,3, Luthfi Gatam1,2,3, Phedy1,2
1Orthopaedic spine surgeon, Fatmawati General Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Background:
Until recently, open decompression was considered the gold standard for the management of spinal stenosis, but the evolution of minimally invasive spine instruments has brought a new dimension to the management of spinal stenosis. Full endoscopic surgery has a lot of advantages in terms of minimal soft tissue damage, less bleeding, shorter hospital length of stay, and earlier return to work. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of full endoscopic lumbar decompression for degenerative lumbar canal stenosis compared with classic open decompression surgery.
Methods:
This is a retrospective cohort study of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis without instability, consisting of 132 open decompression and 163 full endoscopic decompression patients. We evaluated the clinical result of the pre- and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) of leg pain, back pain, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). We observed the patients until 1 year after the operation.
Results:
The postoperative ODI scores and VAS scores for back pain and leg pain were better than the preoperative scores. The ODI scores and VAS scores for leg pain were significantly better in both groups (P = 0.033 and 0.04, respectively). The main difference between open and full endoscopic decompression was the VAS back pain and amount of bleeding. In the full endoscopic group, the mean VAS back pain was 1.6 and the amount of bleeding was minimal. In the open decompression surgery, the mean VAS back pain was 3.5 and the amount of bleeding was around 84 mL. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the full endoscopic group, which was 1.5 days compared with 3.4 days in open decompression (P = 0.034).
Conclusion:
Full endoscopic decompression showed better early results compared with the conventional group, but a long-term study is still needed for further evaluation of the clinical results. The use of the full endoscopic technique is very promising in the management of spinal stenosis.
Clinical Relevance:
This study provides a comparison of the efficacy of open decompression and full endoscopic decompression in degenerative lumbar canal stenosis.
