Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 30, 2025
Author Spotlight: Unveiling the Potential of TUBE Technique in Spinal Surgery
Published on: November 17, 2023
Efficacy of Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis With Single-Arm Analysis
Shuangwen Lv1, Haiwen Lv1, Yupeng He1
1Department of Orthopedic Ward One, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang , Henan , China.
Background And Objective:
Biportal endoscopic decompression is a minimally invasive surgical technique for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biportal endoscopic decompression through both a single-arm analysis and a comparative analysis.
Methods:
A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify eligible studies reporting the outcomes of biportal endoscopic decompression for LSS. Single-arm analysis and comparisons with microscopic and uniportal endoscopic decompression were performed. Evaluated outcomes included visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back pain and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, operation time, estimated blood loss, duration of hospital stay, and adverse events.
Results:
Single-arm analysis demonstrated significant improvements in VAS back pain, VAS leg pain, and ODI scores after biportal endoscopic decompression at postoperative 1-day to 36-month follow-up (all P < .001), compared with preoperative levels. The pooled mean single-level operation time was 71.44 min, and the pooled mean hospital stay was 3.63 days. The overall adverse event rate was 4.0%, with dural tear being the most common complication (3.0%). Compared with microscopic decompression, biportal endoscopic decompression showed significantly lower VAS back pain at 1-month ( P < .001) and 6-month ( P < .001) follow-up; lower VAS leg pain at 1-month ( P = .045) follow-up; lower ODI scores at 3-month ( P < .001), 12-month ( P = .017), and >12-month ( P = .007) follow-up; lower estimated blood loss ( P = .003); and shorter hospital stay ( P < .001). Adverse event rates did not differ between the techniques. No significant differences were observed between biportal endoscopic and uniportal endoscopic decompression groups for most efficacy and safety outcomes.
Conclusion:
Biportal endoscopic decompression emerges as a safe and effective alternative for LSS, presenting potential advantages over the microscopic technique and comparable efficacy with the uniportal endoscopic technique.
