Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 28, 2026

Uniportal Full Endoscopic Posterolateral Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
Published on: June 6, 2025
How many cases to proficiency? A systematic review of the learning curve in endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion
Chinedu Egu1, Hussein Akil2, Thomas Clarke3
1South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust, South Shields, UK. chinedu.brian.egu@gmail.com.
Purpose:
Endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-LIF) is increasingly used as a minimally invasive alternative to conventional MIS-TLIF. While recent systematic reviews have shown comparable clinical and radiographic outcomes, the learning curve for Endo-LIF has not been systematically synthesised. We aimed to evaluate the learning curve of Endo-LIF, determine how many cases are required to achieve proficiency, and assess the impact of surgeon experience on perioperative outcomes.
Methods:
A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA 2020. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies reporting learning-curve analyses of endoscopic lumbar fusion, including Endo-TLIF, ULIF, and UBE-TLIF. Learning-curve methods included cumulative sum (CUSUM), risk-adjusted CUSUM (RA-CUSUM), and chronological grouping. Outcomes included operative time, complications, radiation exposure, fusion, and defined proficiency thresholds.
Results:
Six retrospective cohort studies involving 653 patients were included. Proficiency thresholds ranged from approximately 19 to over 40 cases, with higher thresholds consistently identified when safety-adjusted (RA-CUSUM) rather than time-based methods were used. Operative time and radiation exposure decreased with experience, and learning-sensitive complications clustered early. Fusion rates and patient-reported outcomes were generally stable throughout the learning curve.
Conclusions:
Endo-LIF demonstrates a clinically meaningful learning curve. Operative efficiency improves early, but safety stabilises later, particularly when risk-adjusted methods are applied. Training and credentialing should therefore be guided by safety-based performance metrics rather than operative time alone.
