Clinical EvidenceFor UBE
Literature
Library
Browse our complete UBE literature library — filter by topic; each study links directly to the publication.
- Neurospine, 2026: Endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion vs minimally invasive TLIF: a structured debate and international practice patterns (106 surgeons, 35 countries)
- Neurosurgical Focus, 2026: Wound dehiscence after biportal endoscopic vs microscopic single-level lumbar decompression: post hoc analysis of two RCTs
- Global Spine Journal, 2026: Grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis and outcomes after biportal endoscopic vs microscopic laminectomy: post hoc analysis of a multicentre RCT
- The Spine Journal, 2026: Cost-effectiveness of biportal endoscopic vs microscopic surgery for lumbar degenerative disease: pooled analysis of two RCTs
- Scientific Reports, 2025: Learning curves and clinical outcomes of UBE-TLIF vs uniportal full-endoscopic TLIF for single-level lumbar degenerative disease (retrospective cohort, 95 patients)
- European Spine Journal, 2025: Learning curve in UBE spinal procedures: proficiency cut-offs and impact on efficiency and complications (systematic review)
- Bone & Joint Journal, 2025: Biportal endoscopic vs microscopic discectomy for lumbar herniated disc: a multicentre, prospective, assessor-blinded RCT
- ClinicalTrials.gov NCT07303348, 2025: Multicenter RCT of UBE spinal surgery for degenerative grade 1 spondylolisthesis with lumbar spinal stenosis (ongoing)
- PLOS One, 2025: UBE lumbar interbody fusion vs minimally invasive TLIF in lumbar degenerative diseases: a retrospective multicenter cohort study
- The Spine Journal, 2025: What is the learning curve for endoscopic spine surgery? A comprehensive systematic review
- PMC, 2025: Risk factors for perioperative complications following unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery
- European Spine Journal, 2024: Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy vs microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: systematic review and meta-analysis
- BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2024: UBE decompression vs anterior cervical decompression and fusion for unilateral cervical radiculopathy or coexisting myelopathy: a prospective, randomized, noninferiority trial
- Neurospine, 2024: Clinical outcomes and complications of UBE posterior cervical foraminotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis with comparison to full-endoscopic technique
- Neurospine, 2024: Safety profile of biportal endoscopic spine surgery compared to the conventional microscopic approach: a pooled analysis of 2 RCTs
- Park SM et al, 2023: Biportal endoscopic versus microscopic discectomy for lumbar herniated disc: a randomized controlled trial (The Spine Journal)
- J Neurosurg Spine, 2023: Comparison of lumbar microdiscectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy outcomes: a single-center experience
- Systematic review, 2023: Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy vs percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: systematic review and meta-analysis
- J Orthop Surg Res, 2023: Unilateral biportal endoscopy vs micro-endoscopic discectomy in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis
- Frontiers in Neurology, 2023: Decompression via unilateral biportal endoscopy for severe degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis vs open discectomy: a comparative study
- BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2023: UBE transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion vs conventional interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disease: systematic review and meta-analysis
- Chang Il Ju et al, 2023: Complications and Management of Endoscopic Spinal Surgery
- European Spine Journal, 2023: Clinical outcomes and complications after biportal endoscopic spine surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of 3,673 cases
- Lin et al, 2022: A meta-analysis of microscopic ULBD versus biportal endoscopic ULBD for lumbar canal stenosis
- Trials, 2022: Biportal endoscopic spine surgery vs conventional microscopic discectomy in single-level lumbar disc herniation (ENDO-BH trial): study protocol
- Systematic review, 2022: Complications of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy
- Case-control study, 2022: Clinical and radiologic outcomes of biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy in obese patients
- Simpson et al, 2021: Spinal endoscopy: evidence, techniques, global trends, and future projections
- BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2021: Conventional vs biportal endoscopic decompressive laminectomy in lumbar spinal stenosis (ENDO-B trial): protocol for a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial
- Chen et al, 2020: The evolution of interlaminar endoscopic spine surgery
- Pairuchvej et al, 2019: Full-endoscopic (bi-portal or uni-portal) versus microscopic lumbar decompression laminectomy in spinal stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis
- Choi et al, 2019: Cost-effectiveness of microdiscectomy vs endoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation
- Wasingpongwanich et al, 2019: Full-Endoscopic Interlaminar Lumbar Discectomy: 545 international patients
- Choi et al, 2019: Efficacy of Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
- McGrath et al, 2019: Minimally invasive vs lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression
- Park et al, 2019: Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) vs conventional PLIF: 1-year follow-up
- Hasan et al, 2019: Full-endoscopic vs minimally invasive decompression — hospital stay & complications (J Spine Surg)
- Kim S.K. et al, 2018: Biportal endoscopic vs. microscopic surgery — reduced postoperative pain
- Kim et al, 2018: Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
- Ju-Eun Kim et al, 2018: Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression by 30° endoscopy in lumbar spinal stenosis
- Heo et al, 2017: Fully endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion via percutaneous unilateral biportal endoscopic technique
- Gibson et al, 2016: A randomised controlled trial of transforaminal endoscopic discectomy vs microdiscectomy
- Percutaneous biportal endoscopic decompression, 2015: Technical note and preliminary clinical results for lumbar spinal stenosis
- Rütten et al, 2008: Full-endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal lumbar discectomy vs conventional microsurgical technique (RCT)
Featured Study
Schulthess Klinik PASS Study – EUROSPINE 2017 Full Paper Award
Clear performance gap between spine, hip and knee surgery!
A landmark study from the Schulthess Klinik (Zurich, Switzerland), winner of the EUROSPINE 2017 Full Paper Award, measured and compared a patient experience performance indicator – Patient Accepted Symptom State (PASS) – for patients undergoing lumbar spine, hip and knee surgery. Around 90% of hip patients reach an acceptable symptom state after surgery, but only around 45% of patients after lumbar spine surgery. Its findings underscore the opportunity to elevate spine outcomes and reinforce the need for continued innovation in this field.
Full study reference
EUROSPINE 2017 FULL PAPER AWARD: Time to remove our rose-tinted spectacles: a candid appraisal of the relative success of surgery in over 4500 patients with degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine, hip or knee (Mannion et al., Eur Spine J 2018;27:778–788).

New Study · Neurospine 2026
Endoscopic fusion or MIS-TLIF?
What 106 spine surgeons say
An international structured debate, published in Neurospine 2026.
Spine surgeons from 35 countries compared endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion with minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF). Endoscopic lumbar fusion was favoured for tissue preservation (89.6%), visualization (81.1%) and faster recovery (74.5%), with comparable mid-term clinical outcomes and complication rates to MIS-TLIF.
Importantly, 78.3% of surveyed surgeons recognise endoscopic fusion as a safe and effective option for selected single-level procedures. MIS-TLIF remains more established for complex cases, while long-term fusion and revision outcomes require further evidence.
Full study reference
Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Structured Debate and International Practice Patterns (Boonsirikamchai W, Jitpakdee K, et al., on behalf of the SpineWalker Academy. Neurospine 2026;23(4):832–852).
Panel agreement among 106 spine surgeons
International survey across 35 countries, in favour of endoscopic lumbar fusion
recognise endoscopic fusion as a safe and effective option for selected single-level procedures
Prespecified 70% agreement threshold
Source: Boonsirikamchai W, Jitpakdee K, et al. Neurospine 2026;23(4):832–852.
Access our EnSight™ Whitepaper
Register your details to receive the EnSight™ Whitepaper directly by email.