ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Surg.
Sec. Orthopedic Surgery
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1565165
This article is part of the Research TopicNew Perspectives and Innovative Techniques in Contemporary Spine Surgery - Volume IIView all 5 articles
Endoscopic Discectomy for L4-L5 Disc Herniation: Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy versus Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy
Provisionally accepted
- 1Guangdong Second Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China
- 2Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Objective: This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) in the management of L4-L5 disc herniation, and to identify the procedure most suitable for different types of herniations.: Data were retrospectively collected from patients with L4-L5 disc herniation who underwent PETD or UBED between March 2018 and December 2019. Each group consisted of 34 consecutive patients. Key outcomes, including blood loss, operation time, fluoroscopic time, hospitalization duration, and herniation type, were analyzed and compared. Clinical efficacy was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and modified MacNab criteria.Results: Significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of blood loss, operation time, and fluoroscopic time. Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in VAS scores for back and leg pain, as well as ODI. The proportion of patients achieving excellent or good outcomes was 88.2% for PETD and 91.2% for UBED. Notably, the PETD group had a higher proportion of intervertebral foramentype disc herniations (32.4%) compared to the UBED group (2.9%; P<0.05). Migrationtype herniations were more frequently removed with UBED (35.3%) than with PETD (5.9%; P<0.05).PETD is associated with less blood loss and shorter operation time, making it the preferred choice for intervertebral foramen-type herniations. UBED, with its shorter fluoroscopic time and reduced puncture difficulty, is more suitable for migration-type herniations. Both techniques are effective for treating central, axillary, and shoulder-type disc herniations. With proper patient selection, both PETD and UBED are safe and effective for L4-L5 disc herniation.
Keywords: Unilateral biportal endoscopic, L4-L5, Lumbar disc herniation, Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy, Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED)
Received: 22 Jan 2025; Accepted: 27 May 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Chen, Chen and Zhang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Yu Zhang, Guangdong Second Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510095, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.