One-hole split endoscope versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective propensity score study

Tusheng Li,Qiang Jiang,Wei Zhong,Tengyue Zhu,Zhengcao Lu,Yu Ding
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-04743-7
IF: 2.6
2024-04-24
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Abstract:The one-hole split endoscopy (OSE) was first proposed and clinically applied in China in 2019. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of one-hole split endoscopy (OSE) and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) for treating lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).
orthopedics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
This paper aims to compare the clinical efficacy of One-hole split endoscopy (OSE) and Unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) in the treatment of Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Specifically, the study aims to evaluate the differences between the two techniques in terms of operation time and incision length, and to compare their performance in functional scores, imaging results, and complication rates. The paper analyzes data from 160 LSS patients who underwent OSE or UBE treatment between November 2020 and August 2022 through a retrospective propensity score study. The results show that OSE is superior to UBE in terms of operation time (62.42 ± 4.86 minutes vs. 68.96 ± 4.56 minutes) and incision length (2.30 ± 0.14 cm vs. 2.70 ± 0.15 cm). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay duration, and complication rates. Additionally, there were no significant differences in postoperative functional scores (including VAS-LP, VAS-BP, JOA, and ODI) between the two groups, but all scores improved significantly. Imaging measurements showed that the postoperative dural sac cross-sectional area (DCSA) increased significantly, while lumbar range of motion (ROM) and sagittal translation (ST) remained within normal ranges. According to the modified MacNab criteria, the excellent and good rates were 94.23% in the OSE group and 90.38% in the UBE group, with no statistically significant difference. Therefore, the study suggests that OSE is a feasible and effective treatment method for LSS, with shorter operation time and smaller incision length. Further research is needed to verify its long-term efficacy.