One-hole split endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complications

Abstract Background This study aims to systematically review and conduct a meta-analysis to assess the clinical outcomes and complications associated with the one-hole split endoscopy (OSE) and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease, thereby offering a re...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Chang Deng, Xugui Li, Congjun Wu, Wei Xie, Ming Chen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2025-02-01
Series:Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-025-05591-9
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849723878444630016
author Chang Deng
Xugui Li
Congjun Wu
Wei Xie
Ming Chen
author_facet Chang Deng
Xugui Li
Congjun Wu
Wei Xie
Ming Chen
author_sort Chang Deng
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background This study aims to systematically review and conduct a meta-analysis to assess the clinical outcomes and complications associated with the one-hole split endoscopy (OSE) and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease, thereby offering a reference for clinical decision-making. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted utilizing databases such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, China National Knowledge Network, Wanfang Database, and China Biomedical Literature Database, in conjunction with specific search terms. The retrieved literature was subsequently screened according to stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed using Stata 15.1 software. Results A total of 513 patients were included across five studies, comprising 246 patients in the OSE group and 267 patients in the UBE group. The findings of this meta-analysis indicated that the incision length in the OSE group was significantly shorter than that in the UBE group (SMD = − 1.92, 95%CI: −3.03 to -0.80, P = 0.001). However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores at various postoperative time points, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) values at various postoperative time points, rates of excellent and good outcomes, sagittal translation (ST), range of motion (ROM), and complication rates. Conclusions Both OSE and UBE techniques are considered safe and effective for the management of LDD, demonstrating comparable treatment outcomes. However, OSE techniques offer the advantages of smaller surgical incisions and potentially reduced trauma.
format Article
id doaj-art-6acaa8cf5d574932a9885a8890df456e
institution DOAJ
issn 1749-799X
language English
publishDate 2025-02-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
spelling doaj-art-6acaa8cf5d574932a9885a8890df456e2025-08-20T03:10:54ZengBMCJournal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research1749-799X2025-02-0120111610.1186/s13018-025-05591-9One-hole split endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complicationsChang Deng0Xugui Li1Congjun Wu2Wei Xie3Ming Chen4Department of Spine Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Wuhan Sports UniversityDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Wuhan Sports UniversityDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Wuhan Sports UniversityDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Wuhan Sports UniversityDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Wuhan Sports UniversityAbstract Background This study aims to systematically review and conduct a meta-analysis to assess the clinical outcomes and complications associated with the one-hole split endoscopy (OSE) and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease, thereby offering a reference for clinical decision-making. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted utilizing databases such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, China National Knowledge Network, Wanfang Database, and China Biomedical Literature Database, in conjunction with specific search terms. The retrieved literature was subsequently screened according to stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed using Stata 15.1 software. Results A total of 513 patients were included across five studies, comprising 246 patients in the OSE group and 267 patients in the UBE group. The findings of this meta-analysis indicated that the incision length in the OSE group was significantly shorter than that in the UBE group (SMD = − 1.92, 95%CI: −3.03 to -0.80, P = 0.001). However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores at various postoperative time points, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) values at various postoperative time points, rates of excellent and good outcomes, sagittal translation (ST), range of motion (ROM), and complication rates. Conclusions Both OSE and UBE techniques are considered safe and effective for the management of LDD, demonstrating comparable treatment outcomes. However, OSE techniques offer the advantages of smaller surgical incisions and potentially reduced trauma.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-025-05591-9One-hole split endoscopyUnilateral biportal endoscopyLumbar degenerative diseaseMeta-analysis
spellingShingle Chang Deng
Xugui Li
Congjun Wu
Wei Xie
Ming Chen
One-hole split endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complications
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
One-hole split endoscopy
Unilateral biportal endoscopy
Lumbar degenerative disease
Meta-analysis
title One-hole split endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complications
title_full One-hole split endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complications
title_fullStr One-hole split endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complications
title_full_unstemmed One-hole split endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complications
title_short One-hole split endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complications
title_sort one hole split endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar degenerative disease a systematic review and meta analysis of clinical outcomes and complications
topic One-hole split endoscopy
Unilateral biportal endoscopy
Lumbar degenerative disease
Meta-analysis
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-025-05591-9
work_keys_str_mv AT changdeng oneholesplitendoscopyversusunilateralbiportalendoscopyforlumbardegenerativediseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofclinicaloutcomesandcomplications
AT xuguili oneholesplitendoscopyversusunilateralbiportalendoscopyforlumbardegenerativediseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofclinicaloutcomesandcomplications
AT congjunwu oneholesplitendoscopyversusunilateralbiportalendoscopyforlumbardegenerativediseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofclinicaloutcomesandcomplications
AT weixie oneholesplitendoscopyversusunilateralbiportalendoscopyforlumbardegenerativediseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofclinicaloutcomesandcomplications
AT mingchen oneholesplitendoscopyversusunilateralbiportalendoscopyforlumbardegenerativediseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofclinicaloutcomesandcomplications