Is YouTube a Reliable and Quality Source on Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery? A Cross-Sectional Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos focusing on unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery, a novel technique for spinal decompression in degenerative spinal disease.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study, conducted in February 2023, involved an online search on YouTube using the term "unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery". Video popularity was assessed using the Video Power Index. Video reliability and quality were measured using the Global Quality Scale, the Journal of the American Medical Association benchmark criteria, and the modified DISCERN instrument.

RESULTS

Ninety-three videos were included for evaluation. Uploader profiles were categorized by continent, with 61.3% from Asia, 35.5% from the United States, 2.2% from Africa, and 1.1% from Australia. When comparing 3 groups as South Korea, United States, and other countries, no significant differences were observed in the technical characteristics of the videos. However, the educational quality and reliability of the videos were higher in those uploaded from South Korea (P < 0.001).When the videos were divided into 2 groups according to their educational quality, significant difference were noted in video duration, loading time, video quality, and reliability (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The YouTube videos on unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery showed high quality and reliability. However, videos from South Korea were found to have higher educational quality and reliability, while other specifications were similar for all videos. Furthermore, it was determined that videos uploaded more recently and with longer duration were of higher quality.

Biportal endoscopic cervical open-door laminoplasty to treat cervical spondylotic myelopathy

BACKGROUND

Although cervical laminoplasty is a frequently utilized surgical intervention for cervical spondylotic myelopathy, it is primarily performed using conventional open surgical techniques. We attempted the minimally invasive cervical laminoplasty using biportal endoscopic approach.

METHODS

Contralateral lamina access is facilitated by creating space through spinous process drilling, followed by lamina hinge formation. Subsequently, the incised lamina is elevated from ipsilateral aspect, and secure metal plate fixation is performed.

CONCLUSION

We successfully performed the cervical open door laminoplasty using biportal endoscopic approach. Biportal endoscopic cervical open-door laminoplasty may be a minimally invasive technique that can prevent complications related with open surgery.

Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Clinical Results for 163 Patients

BACKGROUND

Biportal endoscopy spine surgery is an endoscopic procedure that uses 2 portals, 1 for the endoscope and 1 for the instruments. It provides an excellent and very versatile field of view, with the advantage of another portal to approach the most common degenerative lumbar pathologies.

METHODS

We evaluated a retrospective series of patients who underwent biportal endoscopy with ≥1 year of follow-up. Relevant epidemiological and clinical data, such as the Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale for pain, were also considered. Complications and the effects of the learning curve are also discussed.

RESULTS

We included 163 patients treated within a 5-year period with ≥1 year of follow-up available. The main pathologies were disc herniation (53.4%), foraminal stenosis (19%), and central canal stenosis (16.6%). The outcomes regarding disability and pain scores after surgery were very good, with a redistribution of the patient sample to the mild categories of disability. Inferential analysis showed relative and absolute improvements for both disc herniation and canal stenosis in terms of the Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale for pain, especially for disc herniation. The incidence of complications was approximately 7%. The most common approach was interlaminar (89%), and the most common pathology was disc herniation (54.9%). The duration of surgery overall and for the different stages had improved at the end of the learning curve with a reduction of almost 58 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

Biportal endoscopy is a minimally invasive procedure that is safe and effective, with a low rate of complications. It has a reproducible learning curve and provides very good outcomes regarding functionality and pain scores.

How I do it: the biportal endoscopic inclined-ipsilateral technique to decompress the lumbar lateral recess

BACKGROUND

Various full-endoscopic techniques have been developed to reach the lateral recess of the lumbar spine. However, specialized surgical tools, including expensive spinal endoscopic systems, and a steeper learning curve to mastering the technique are required.

METHOD

We present a novel target-addressed unilateral biportal endoscopic technique to reach directly the lumbar lateral recess, particularly useful at L4-L5 and L5-S1. The technique follows an inclined-ipsilateral trajectory to preserve the lateral extension of ligamentum flavum and the facet joint as much as possible.

CONCLUSION

This technique was associated with all the advantages of minimally invasive decompressive procedures and outstanding outcomes.

Clinical outcomes of uniportal compared with biportal endoscopic decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) treatment has evolved with the introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques. Endoscopic methods take the concepts applied to MIS a step further, with multiple studies showing that endoscopic techniques have outcomes that are similar to those of more traditional approaches. The aim of this study was to perform an updated meta-analysis and systematic review of studies comparing the outcomes between both available endoscopic techniques (uni and biportal) for the treatment of LSS.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic literature search and compared the randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies of uniportal and biportal endoscopy in the treatment of LSS from several databases. Bias was assessed using quality assessment criteria and funnel plots. Meta-analysis using a random-effects model was used to synthesize the metadata. The authors used Review Manager 5.4 to manage the date and perform the review.

RESULTS

After a preliminary selection of 388 studies from electronic databases, the full inclusion criteria were applied; three studies were found to be eligible for inclusion. There were 184 patients from three unique studies. Meta-analysis of visual analog scale score for low back pain and leg pain showed no significant difference at the final follow-up (P = 0.51 and P = 0.66). ODI score after biportal surgery was lower than uniportal surgery [SMD = 0.34, 95% CI (0.04, 0.63), P = 0.02]. The mean operation time was similar in the unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) and uniportal groups (P = 0.53). The UBE group was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (P = 0.05). Complications were similar in both groups (P = 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence shows no significant differences in most clinical outcomes between uniportal and biportal surgery. UBE may have a better ODI score at the end of the follow-up compared to uniportal. Further studies are required before drawing a definite conclusion.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO prospective register of systematic reviews: Registration Nº. CRD42022339078, Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/displayrecord.php?ID=CRD42022339078.

Enhanced recovery after surgery pathway with modified biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using a large cage. Comparative study with minimally invasive microscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

PURPOSE

Studies about the clinical efficacy of endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion using an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway are insufficient. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate clinical usefulness of biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using an ERAS compared with microscopic TLIF.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data were retrospectively analyzed. Patients who received modified biportal endoscopic TLIF with ERAS were grouped into an endoscopic TLIF group. Those who received microscopic TLIF without ERAS were grouped into a microscopic TLIF group. Clinical and radiologic parameters were compared between two groups. Fusion rate was evaluated using sagittal reconstruction images of postoperative computed tomographic (CT) scan.

RESULTS

There were 32 patients in the endoscopic TLIF group with ERAS and 41 patients in the microscopic TLIF group without ERAS. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back pain preoperatively at day one and day two were significantly (p < 0.05) higher in the non-ERAS microscopic TLIF group than in the ERAS endoscopic TLIF group. Preoperative Oswestry Disability Index were significantly improved at the last follow-up in both groups. The fusion rate at postoperative one year was 87.5% in the endoscopic TLIF group and 85.4% in the microscopic TLIF group.

CONCLUSION

Biportal endoscopic TLIF with ERAS pathway may have good aspect to accelerate recovery after surgery. There was no inferiority of fusion rate of endoscopic TLIF comparing to microscopic TLIF. Biportal endoscopic TLIF using a large cage with ERAS pathway may be a good alternative treatment for lumbar degenerative disease.

Uniportal versus biportal endoscopic spine surgery: a comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic spine surgery techniques are minimally invasive alternatives to conventional open surgery for degenerative spinal diseases. Clinical studies and meta-analyses have proven the usefulness of uniportal full-endoscopic spine procedures. However, a steep learning curve is a critical barrier for endoscopic procedures. Recently, biportal endoscopic spine surgeries have been developed to make it easier for spine surgeons to learn and perform. Consequently, the biportal approach has gained popularity among aspiring endoscopic spine surgeons. This review compared the characteristics of uniportal and biportal surgeries to help spine surgeons perform endoscopic procedures more effectively.

AREA COVERED

The review analyzed English-language clinical literature in Core databases and compared uniportal and biportal endoscopic spine surgery techniques. Clinical studies have compared the technical principles of both techniques, and the authors suggested appropriate strategies for learning and practicing endoscopic procedures.

EXPERT OPINION

Uniportal, full-endoscopic spine surgery is a minimally invasive procedure that preserves muscles and uses a keyhole approach under local anesthesia. In contrast, biportal surgery is more familiar to a surgeon and can be performed more widely, although the keyhole approach is limited. Aspiring endoscopic spine surgeons can learn either method according to the surgeon's preference and the clinical situation.

Comparison of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy with Other Surgical Technics: A Systemic Review of Indications and Outcomes of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy from the Current Literature

OBJECTIVE

Unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) spine surgery for spinal diseases has been increasing in popularity because of its favorable outcomes. The goal of this systemic review is to analyze the status of outcomes and complications in lumbar disc herniation during UBE discectomy.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and OVID databases published until June 30, 2021, was performed. The outcomes of interest were indications, operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, complications, visual analog scale score, and Oswestry Disability Index.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included in our research. UBE surgery for lumbar stenosis was excluded. A total of 230 patients with lumbar disc herniation were enrolled in the 7 selected studies. The mean operative time was 74.4 minutes, and the mean length of hospital stay was 4.5 days. Mean incidence of complications reported in the 7 articles was 6.2%. UBE showed shorter hospital stays than did microdiscectomy, no significant differences of Oswestry Disability Index or visual analog scale scores, and good recovery rate among other discectomy techniques (microdiscectomy, full endoscopic transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy, and interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy) at 1 month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Even with the small number of studies and reports analyzed, biases were the main limitation of this analysis; overall, the clinical outcomes and complication rates associated with UBE discectomy were relatively good. It is clear that UBE discectomy is a good treatment choice for lumbar disc herniation, but to prevent unique UBE surgery complications, a clear understanding of the surgical procedures and careful efforts to overcome the learning curve are necessary.

Surgical Removal of Cervical Extradural Cysts Using the Biportal Endoscopic Approach

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic intraspinal extradural cysts of the cervical spine are uncommon; however, they are usually treated using conventional posterior decompression. Biportal endoscopic surgery is widely used to treat degenerative cervical pathological conditions. This study presented an optimized surgical technique for a biportal endoscopic posterior approach for removal of cervical intraspinal extradural cysts that caused cervical radiculomyelopathy.

METHODS

A broad laminotomy was performed, which was wider than the outer contour of the cysts. The ligamentum flavum was detached from the bony margin and removed after an epidural dissection, and a dense adhesive tissue entrapped the extradural cysts. A spinal endoscope was placed close to the dissection plane and offered a high-resolution magnified view. The cyst capsule was safely dissected from the dura and removed en bloc without dural injury.

RESULTS

Postoperatively, neurological deficits, including cervical myelopathy, radiating arm pain, and upper back pain improved in both patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully removed an extradural cervical cystic mass lesion by using a biportal endoscopic posterior cervical approach without complications. The biportal endoscopic approach may have advantages, such as minimizing trauma to the normal structures of the posterior cervical region, magnified endoscopic view, and early recovery after the surgery. Biportal endoscopy may be used as an alternative surgical treatment for symptomatic cervical intraspinal extradural cystic lesions.

Contralateral sublaminar approach for decompression of the combined lateral recess, foraminal, and extraforaminal lesions using biportal endoscopy: a technical report

BACKGROUND

The development of specialized instruments and surgical techniques has enabled the biportal endoscopic system to access the foraminal and extraforaminal area using the contralateral sublaminar approach at the lumbar level.

METHODS

Biportal endoscopic contralateral sublaminar approach was used to resolve the contralateral foraminal, and extraforaminal stenosis at the lumbar level. Prominent syndesmophytes and herniated disc compression of the exiting nerve root were successfully removed, and the distorted nerve root was restored to a smooth downward angulation in the far-out area.

CONCLUSION

We successfully utilized biportal endoscopy to decompress the combined lumbar lateral recess, foraminal, and extraforaminal lesions using a contralateral sublaminar approach.

Biportal endoscopic unilateral laminotomy with bilateral decompression for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy

BACKGROUND

The advantages of biportal endoscopic approaches over conventional open surgery include the preservation of the normal structures, less intraoperative bleeding, fast postoperative recovery, and preservation of the motion segments.

METHOD

We attempted the posterior biportal endoscopic approach for cervical stenosis at the C5-C6-C7 levels. Biportal endoscopic right ipsilateral hemilaminectomy with bilateral decompression at the C5-C6-C7 levels and right foraminotomy at the C6-C7 level were performed under general anesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully performed neural decompression at the C5-C6-C7 levels using biportal endoscopic surgery. The biportal endoscopic posterior cervical approach may be an alternative surgical method for treating cervical myelopathy.

Modified far lateral endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using a biportal endoscopic approach: technical report and preliminary results

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has the disadvantage of the small cage size and by consequence risk for cage subsidence. We succeeded to insert a large oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) cage during biportal endoscopic TLIF.

METHODS

Unilateral total facetectomy was performed to expose the exiting and traversing nerve roots. The distance between the exiting and traversing nerve roots was measured before OLIF cage insertion. We inserted an OLIF cage instead of a TLIF cage.

CONCLUSION

We successfully performed modified far lateral biportal endoscopic TLIF using large OLIF cages. Modified far lateral biportal endoscopic TLIF is usually suitable for the L4-5 and L5-S1 levels.

Endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic spine surgery has been developed as a minimally invasive technique for decompression in patients with lumbar disc herniation or lumbar stenosis. Recent reports have described the use of endoscopic technology in lumbar fusion surgeries, especially for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). This review aimed to summarize the current techniques of endoscopic TLIF and to discuss the benefits, limitations, and future perspectives of endoscopic lumbar fusion surgery.

AREAS COVERED

This review covered the English-language medical literature published in Medline and focused specifically on endoscopic technologies incorporated into minimally invasive TLIF. The endoscopic TLIF techniques are categorized here according to the properties of the endoscope: percutaneous endoscopic TLIF, biportal endoscopic TLIF, and microendoscopic TLIF. Even though most authors have reported favorable clinical and radiological outcomes of endoscopic TLIF, such evidence originates mainly from case series.

EXPERT OPINION

Although the current level of evidence is low and the technical relevance of the technique is controversial, the key concept and early results of endoscopic TLIF are promising. Technical advancements to improve safety and reduce technical complexity, as well as comparative cohort studies and randomized clinical trials with long-term follow-up are required to promote the adoption of endoscopic TLIF in clinical practice.

How I do it? Biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis

BACKGROUND

Prevalent endoscopic spine surgeries have shown limitations especially in spinal stenosis (Ahn in Neurosurgery 75(2):124-133, 2014). Biportal endoscopic surgery is introduced to manage central and foraminal stenosis with its wide range of access angle and clear view.

METHODS

The authors provide an introduction of this technique followed by a description of the surgical anatomy with discussion on its indications and advantages. In particular, tricks to avoid complications are also presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective circumferential and focal decompression were achieved in most cases without damage to the spinal structural integrity with preservation of muscular and ligamentous attachments. The biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) may be safely used as an alternative minimally invasive procedure for lumbar spinal stenosis (Figs. 1 and 2).