Clinical outcomes of one-hole split endoscope versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative diseases
- 1XinJiang Medical University , ,
- 2Xinjiang Medical University Affiliated Fourth Hospital , ,
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of the novel One-hole Split Endoscope (OSE) technique with the established Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE) technique for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD).
Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2021 to December 2023, involving 116 patients with LDD. Patients were allocated to either the OSE group (n = 60) or the UBE group (n = 56). Perioperative outcomes (operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, incision length), clinical scores (VAS for back/leg pain, ODI), and complication rates were systematically compared between the two groups.
Results: Both groups demonstrated significant clinical improvement postoperatively. The OSE procedure required a longer operative time (135.8 ± 12.6 min vs. 102.4 ± 10.9 min, P < 0.001). However, the OSE group demonstrated advantages in several key perioperative metrics, including a significantly shorter hospital stay (3.9 ± 0.8 days vs. 5.4 ± 1.1 days, P < 0.001) and a smaller incision length (1.5 ± 0.2 cm vs. 2.7 ± 0.3 cm, P < 0.001). Intraoperative blood loss was minimal and comparable between the two groups (P > 0.05). The OSE group also showed earlier and superior functional recovery, evidenced by significantly lower ODI scores at 1-week, 1-month, and final follow-up (P < 0.05), whereas no significant differences were found in postoperative pain VAS scores or in the overall complication rate (P = 0.127).
Conclusion: Both OSE and UBE techniques are effective and safe for treating LDD. Despite a longer operative time, the OSE technique offers distinct advantages in minimizing surgical trauma, promoting faster recovery, and achieving better early functional outcomes. OSE represents a valuable and innovative minimally invasive option in the spine surgeon's arsenal.
Related
- Arthroscopic-assisted uni-portal spinal surgery versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complications
- Comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression for single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective comparative study involving clinical efficacy and cost analysis
- Clinical Outcomes and Feasibility of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Thoracic Ossification of the Ligamentum Flavum: A Retrospective Single-Center Study
- Tumor-mimicking lumbar intradural disc herniation managed with unilateral biportal endoscopy: a case report
- Day of Arrival as a Determinant of Endoscopy Timing in Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Natural-Experiment Cohort Study of Clinical Outcomes and Length of Stay
BibTeX
@article{li2026clinical,
title = {{Clinical outcomes of one-hole split endoscope versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative diseases}},
author = {Cheng Li and Yifei Huang and Yuanyuan Dou and Muhaimaiti Abudurezhake and Lin Li and Qiucheng Chen and Kun Wang and Hailong Wang and Wu Xiaoye and Zhanjun Ma},
journal = {Frontiers in surgery},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3389/fsurg.2026.1915621},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13725207},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Clinical outcomes of one-hole split endoscope versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative diseases
AU - Cheng Li
AU - Yifei Huang
AU - Yuanyuan Dou
AU - Muhaimaiti Abudurezhake
AU - Lin Li
AU - Qiucheng Chen
AU - Kun Wang
AU - Hailong Wang
AU - Wu Xiaoye
AU - Zhanjun Ma
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/19
JO - Frontiers in surgery
DO - 10.3389/fsurg.2026.1915621
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13725207
AB - Objective: This study aims to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of the novel One-hole Split Endoscope (OSE) technique with the established Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE) technique for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD). Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2021 to December 2023, involving 116 patients with LDD. Patients were allocated to either the OSE group (n = 60) or the UBE group (n = 56). Perioperative outcomes (operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, incision length), clinical scores (VAS for back/leg pain, ODI), and complication rates were systematically compared between the two groups. Results: Both groups demonstrated significant clinical improvement postoperatively. The OSE procedure required a longer operative time (135.8 ± 12.6 min vs. 102.4 ± 10.9 min, P < 0.001). However, the OSE group demonstrated advantages in several key perioperative metrics, including a significantly shorter hospital stay (3.9 ± 0.8 days vs. 5.4 ± 1.1 days, P < 0.001) and a smaller incision length (1.5 ± 0.2 cm vs. 2.7 ± 0.3 cm, P < 0.001). Intraoperative blood loss was minimal and comparable between the two groups (P > 0.05). The OSE group also showed earlier and superior functional recovery, evidenced by significantly lower ODI scores at 1-week, 1-month, and final follow-up (P < 0.05), whereas no significant differences were found in postoperative pain VAS scores or in the overall complication rate (P = 0.127). Conclusion: Both OSE and UBE techniques are effective and safe for treating LDD. Despite a longer operative time, the OSE technique offers distinct advantages in minimizing surgical trauma, promoting faster recovery, and achieving better early functional outcomes. OSE represents a valuable and innovative minimally invasive option in the spine surgeon's arsenal.
SN - 2296-875X
ER -