Objective This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) using biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) in patients with central canal stenosis, with and without low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).
Methods A retrospective observational study was conducted on 170 patients who underwent BESS-ULBD between 2015 and 2018, with at least 2 years of follow-up. Patients were categorized into 2 groups: group A (68 patients) with central stenosis and low-grade DLS and group B (102 patients) with central stenosis alone. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Modified MacNab criteria. Radiological assessments included sagittal translation measurements on dynamic flexion-extension radiographs.
Results Both groups significantly improved clinical outcomes at the final follow-up (p<0.05). Group A’s mean VAS scores improved from 3.8±2.4 to 1.9±2.0 for back pain and from 6.4±1.8 to 2.3±2.0 for leg pain. In group B, back pain improved from 3.9±2.5 to 1.7±1.9, and leg pain from 6.6±2.0 to 2.2±2.2. ODI scores also improved significantly in both groups. Radiological evaluation showed no significant changes in sagittal translation postoperatively, indicating preserved spinal stability. Both groups had comparable clinical outcomes, with no major complications reported.
Conclusion BESS-ULBD is a safe and effective minimally invasive option for managing central canal stenosis, with or without low-grade DLS. This technique provides substantial symptom relief, preserves spinal stability, and presents a promising alternative to more invasive fusion procedures in carefully selected patients.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Future Directions in the Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Parikshit Juvekar, Susan Christopher, Zoher Ghogawala Neurosurgery Clinics of North America.2026; 37(1): 143. CrossRef
Trends in Utilization and Cost of Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression in Ambulatory Surgical Centers: A Nationwide Database Analysis From 2018 Through 2022 Mitchell K. Ng, Paul G. Mastrokostas, Leonidas E. Mastrokostas, Aaron B. Lavi, Luke B. Schwartz, Yasmine K. Eichbaum, Yulia Lee, Morgan Hitchner, William Green, Gregorio Baek, Joshua Mathew, Jonathan Dalton, Alec Giakas, Rajendra Singh, Afshin E. Razi, Ia Global Spine Journal.2026; 16(5): 2252. CrossRef
A Commentary on “International Practice Patterns in the Surgical Management of Primary Lumbar Disc Herniation: An AO Spine Cross-Sectional Study” Jin-Sung Kim Neurospine.2026; 23(1): 40. CrossRef
Response to the letter to the editor: Inconsistencies in obesity criteria: implications for systematic reviews on endoscopic spine surgery Wongthawat Liawrungrueang, Watcharaporn Cholamjiak, Peem Sarasombath, Yudha Mathan Sakti, Pang Hung Wu, Meng-Huang Wu, Yu-Jen Lu, Lo Cho Yau, Zenya Ito, Sung Tan Cho, Dong-Gune Chang, Kang Taek Lim Asian Spine Journal.2026; 20(1): 211. CrossRef
Targeted Decompression Under Local Anesthesia versus Extensive Decompression Under General Anesthesia for Octogenarians with Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Real-World Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Hang Zhang, Huili Cai, Yunzhong Cheng, Xuelin Li, Yang Liu, Fengping Liu, Jingchuan Sun, Haidan Chen Clinical Interventions in Aging.2026; Volume 21: 1. CrossRef
Application of minimally invasive decompression interventions for the surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolysthesis P. Remov, A. Babkin, S. Zalepugin, A. Mazurenko, S. Jurchenko, A. Malashenko, A. Kartyzhova, Yu. Aniskevich, D. Sackevich Healthcare.2026; (5): 4. CrossRef
Advancing Endoscopic Decompression in Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis – A Commentary on “Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis With Stenosis” Jin-Sung Kim Neurospine.2025; 22(2): 566. CrossRef
Clinical outcomes of navigation-assisted versus fluoroscopy-guided UBE-ULBD in single-level lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective study Shi-Jie Liu, Si-Yuan Yao, Yao Zhang, Wan-Cheng lin, Li-Xiang Ding, Ji-Peng Song BMC Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Objective Full endoscopic cervical surgery (FECS) is an evolving minimally invasive approach for treating cervical spine disorders. This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on the clinical outcomes and patient perspectives associated with FECS, specifically evaluating its safety, efficacy, and overall patient satisfaction.
Methods A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies published between January 2000 and September 2024 that reported on clinical outcomes or patient perspectives related to FECS were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective studies, and observational studies focused on adult populations undergoing FECS for cervical spine surgery.
Results The final synthesis included 30 studies. FECS was associated with significant reductions in both cervical and radicular pain, as well as meaningful functional improvements, measured by standardized clinical scales such as the Neck Disability Index and visual analogue scale. Patient satisfaction rates were consistently high, with most studies reporting satisfaction exceeding 85%. Complication rates were low, primarily involving transient neurological deficits that were typically resolved without the need for further intervention. Nonrandomized studies generally presented a moderate risk of bias due to confounding and selection, whereas randomized controlled trials exhibited a low risk of bias.
Conclusion FECS is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical option for cervical spine disorders associated with substantial pain relief, functional improvement and high levels of patient satisfaction.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Response to the letter to the editor: Inconsistencies in obesity criteria: implications for systematic reviews on endoscopic spine surgery Wongthawat Liawrungrueang, Watcharaporn Cholamjiak, Peem Sarasombath, Yudha Mathan Sakti, Pang Hung Wu, Meng-Huang Wu, Yu-Jen Lu, Lo Cho Yau, Zenya Ito, Sung Tan Cho, Dong-Gune Chang, Kang Taek Lim Asian Spine Journal.2026; 20(1): 211. CrossRef
Full-Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy and Discectomy for Cervical Disc Hernia With Unilateral Radiculopathy Idris Gurpinar, Mehmet Yigit Akgun, Furkan Almas, Ozkan Ates Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique.2026; 11(1): 149. CrossRef
Current Trends and Future Directions in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Review of Emerging Techniques and Evolving Management Paradigms Gianluca Galieri, Vittorio Orlando, Roberto Altieri, Manlio Barbarisi, Alessandro Olivi, Giovanni Sabatino, Giuseppe La Rocca Journal of Clinical Medicine.2025; 14(10): 3390. CrossRef
Navigated Minimally Invasive Cervical and Cervicothoracic Fixation: A Technical Note on Surgical Technique and Proposed Classification Spyridon Komaitis, Konstantinos Zygogiannis, Sotirios Karatzoglou, Dimitrios Klitsinikos, Dritan Pasku, Khalid Salem Cureus.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Sang-Min Park, Kwang-Sup Song, Dae-Woong Ham, Ho-Joong Kim, Min-Seok Kang, Ki-Han You, Choon Keun Park, Dong-Keun Lee, Jin-Sung Kim, Hong-Jae Lee, Hyun-Jin Park
Neurospine 2024;21(4):1190-1198. Published online December 31, 2024
Objective To compare the safety profiles of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) and microscopic spinal surgery (MSS) for lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis by analyzing the associated adverse events.
Methods We pooled data from 2 prospective randomized controlled trials involving 220 patients (110 in each group) who underwent single-level lumbar surgery. Participants aged 20–80 years with radiating pain due to lumbar disc herniation or spinal stenosis were included in this study. Adverse events were recorded and analyzed over a 12-month follow-up period.
Results The overall adverse event rates were 9.1% (10 of 110) in the BESS group and 17.3% (19 of 110) in the MSS group, which were not statistically significantly different (p=0.133). Notably, wound dehiscence occurred in 8.2% of MSS cases but in none of the BESS cases. Both groups showed similarly low rates of complications, such as dural tears, epidural hematoma, and nerve root injury. The most common adverse event in the BESS group was recurrent disc herniation (2.7%), whereas that in the MSS group was wound dehiscence (8.2%).
Conclusion BESS demonstrated a safety profile comparable to that of MSS for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis, with a trend towards fewer overall complications. BESS offers particular advantages in terms of reducing wound-related complications. These findings suggest that BESS is a safe alternative to conventional MSS and potentially offers the benefits of a minimally invasive approach without compromising patient safety.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Editorial: Beyond the Portal Wars—Forging a New Consensus in Endoscopic Spine Surgery Jin-Sung Kim, Piya Chavalparit Global Spine Journal.2026; 16(1): 9. CrossRef
Comparison of paraspinal muscle changes after biportal endoscopic and microscopic lumbar discectomy or decompression Ki-Han You, Sang-Min Park, Daniel Park, Min-Seok Kang, Seung-Yeon Jeong, Sun-Ho Cha, Samuel Cho, Hyun-Jin Park European Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Improvement in low back pain following endoscopic decompression for spinal stenosis Maria Auron, Yihyun Roh, Maria C. Pedraza Ciro, Win Boonsirikamchai, Yi-Hao Liang, Jung Hoon Kim, Jin-Sung Kim Brain and Spine.2026; 6: 105995. CrossRef
A Systematic Review of Complication Management During Uniportal and Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Dural Tear and Bleeding Siravich Suvithayasiri, Ju Eun Kim, Facundo Van Isseldyk, Marcus Serra, Christopher Martin, Viswanadha Arunkumar, Sotirios Veranis, Prashanth Rao, Enrico Giordan, Piya Chavalparit, Nelson Astur, Samuel Cho, Jin Sung Kim Global Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Complications in Minimally Invasive Cervical Spine Surgery–Tubular, Uniportal, and Biportal Endoscopic Surgery (2013–2024) Noah Willett, Chibuikem A. Ikwuegbuenyi, Sean Inzerillo, Eesha Gurav, Mousa Hamad, Ibrahim Hussain, Alan Hernández-Hernández, Galal Elsayed, Osama Kashlan, Roger Härtl Spine.2026; 51(7): E175. CrossRef
Asymptomatic multisegmental epidural hematoma following unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression: a case report Chun-li Zeng, Jian-cai Zhang, Jin-song Yu, Meng-jun Liu Journal of Medical Case Reports.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
O‐Arm Navigation Enhances Facet Preservation Without Compromising Clinical Outcomes in UBE Decompression for Radiographically Stable Adult Degenerative Scoliosis: A Single‐Center Comparative Study Yi Liu, Yiwei Xie, Zhibao Chen, Ruijun Xu, Haojie Chen, Xiaojian Ye, Jiangming Yu Orthopaedic Surgery.2026; 18(6): 1203. CrossRef
Comparison of outcomes after unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy versus percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies Abdullah Afridi, Ayesha Zulfiqar, Muhammad Waqar Shahid, Fatima Sajjad, Hamnah Sohail, Fazia Khattak, Sabir Khan, Ayesha Naseem, Alina Batool, Muhammad Muneeb, Savira Khattak, Izhar Ul Haq, Ayesha Shahid, Ayesha Nauman, Marium Nisar, Tanveer Hussain, Ahsa Egyptian Journal of Neurosurgery.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Functional Outcome of Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery Versus Destandau Endoscopic Spine Surgery: A Structured Narrative Review Paresh C Dey, Saurav N Nanda, Saswat Samant, Ashok K Gachhayat, Abhay Tyagi, Sayashi S, Sumit Kaushik Cureus.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Safety and Utility of Bilateral-contralateral Decompression for Adjacent Segment Stenosis After Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy Dong Hyun Lee, Choon Keun Park, Jae-Won Jang, Dong-Geun Lee Clinical Spine Surgery.2025; 38(10): E488. CrossRef
Far-Lateral Transforaminal Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniations Jin Seop Hwang, Sang Hyub Lee, Dain Jeong, Jae-Won Jang, Yong Eun Cho, Dong-Geun Lee, Choon Keun Park, Chung Kee Chough Neurospine.2025; 22(1): 14. CrossRef
O-arm navigation-based transforaminal unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for upper lumbar disc herniation: an innovative preliminary study Dong Hyun Lee, Choon Keun Park, Jin-Sung Kim, Jin Sub Hwang, Jin Young Lee, Dong-Geun Lee, Jae-Won Jang, Jun Yong Kim, Yong-Eun Cho, Dong Chan Lee Asian Spine Journal.2025; 19(2): 194. CrossRef
Analgesic-soaked acellular dermal matrix for postoperative pain control after endoscopic spine surgery: a retrospective chart review Doohun Hyun, Woo Min Park, Jung Hoon Park, Chai Min Yoo, Woo Joo Lee, Shih Min Lee, Cheol Wung Park Journal of Korean Society of Geriatric Neurosurgery.2025; 21(2): 68. CrossRef
Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Biportal Endoscopic Revision Extraforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Following Previous Central Decompression: A Case Series Seung-Yeon Jeong, Hyun-Jin Park, Jin-Ho Park, Gab-Lae Kim Journal of Advanced Spine Surgery.2025; 15(2): 84. CrossRef
Objective Biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (BE-TLIF) is an emerging, minimally invasive technique performed under biportal endoscopic guidance. However, concerns regarding cage subsidence and sufficient fusion during BE-TLIF necessitate careful selection of an appropriate interbody cage to improve surgical outcomes. This study compared the fusion rate, subsidence, and other radiographic parameters according to the material and size of the cages used in BE-TLIF.
Methods In this retrospective cohort study, patients who underwent single-segment BE-TLIF between April 2019 and February 2023 were divided into 3 groups: group A, regular-sized three-dimensionally (3D)-printed titanium cages; group B, regular-sized polyetheretherketone cages; and group C, large-sized 3D-printed titanium cages. Radiographic parameters, including lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, anterior and posterior disc heights, disc angle, and foraminal height, were measured before and after surgery. The fusion rate and severity of cage subsidence were compared between the groups.
Results No significant differences were noted in the demographic data or radiographic parameters between the groups. The fusion rate on 1-year postoperative computed tomography was comparable between the groups. The cage subsidence rate was significantly lower in group C than in group A (41.9% vs. 16.7%, p=0.044). The severity of cage subsidence was significantly lower in group C (0.93±0.83) than in groups A (2.20±1.84, p=0.004) and B (1.79±1.47, p=0.048).
Conclusion Cage materials did not affect the 1-year postoperative outcomes of BE-TLIF; however, subsidence was markedly reduced in large cages. Larger cages may provide more stable postoperative segments.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Development and Validation of a Predictive Model and Web-Based Calculator for Cage Subsidence After Midline Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIDLIF) Surgery Mingzheng Zhao, Honghao Yang, Shixuan Guo, Jun Miao, Zepei Zhang, Yangpu Zhang, Kuan Li, Fengqi Cheng, Jing Su, Yaoshen Zhang, Yong Hai, Yuzeng Liu Global Spine Journal.2026; 16(3): 1423. CrossRef
Influence of surgical technique, interbody characteristics, and radiographic parameters on fusion rates across the disc space and posterolateral elements following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion Zach Pennington, Abdelrahman Hamouda, Omar Hafz, Anthony L. Mikula, Michelle J. Clarke, William E. Krauss, Brett A. Freedman, Melvin D. Helgeson, Ahmad N. Nassr, Arjun S. Sebastian, Jeremy L. Fogelson, Benjamin D. Elder Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery.2026; 261: 109285. CrossRef
Sagittal Alignment and Clinical Outcomes After Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using a Single Expandable Cage: One Year Follow-up Sub-Ri Park, Namhoo Kim, Ji-Won Kwon, Kyung-Soo Suk, Hak-Sun Kim, Seong-Hwan Moon, Si-Young Park, Byung Ho Lee, Jae-Won Shin, Jin-Oh Park World Neurosurgery.2026; 205: 124698. CrossRef
Advancements in unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion: a narrative review Penghui Lv, Lu Li, Sichao Cheng, Jincheng Bai, Jianjun Chang European Journal of Medical Research.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
A Review of Synthetic Bone Grafts in Lumbar Interbody Fusion Jaden Wise, Isabella Merem, Dahlia Wrubluski, Xuanzong Zhang, Ridge Weston, Min Shi, Maohua Lin, Frank D. Vrionis Bioengineering.2026; 13(3): 262. CrossRef
Clinical and radiologic outcomes of expandable versus static cages in biportal endoscopic TLIF: focus on endplate injury and subsidence Tae Hoon Kang, Geumho Lee, Byungjun Kang, Jeongwoon Han, Hyun-jin Park, Minjoon Cho, Jae Hyup Lee Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
En bloc discectomy via anterior lumbar approach: a technical note Harmantya Mahadhipta, Amri Muhyi, Muhamad Abdul Harist Fadhlizain, Mitchel Mitchel, Karina Sylvana Gani, Erica Kholinne SICOT-J.2026; 12: 19. CrossRef
Clinical outcomes and radiologic parameters of percutaneous endoscopic posterior/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using rammed-earth technique Qingyang Kang, Zhilin Ge, Jiheng Zhan, Xuzhou Li, Guanwei Huang, Guoyi Su Frontiers in Surgery.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Titanium-coated PEEK versus 3D-printed porous titanium cages in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A meta-analysis Youngmin Yu, Thomas Cho, Jiayong Liu Journal of Orthopaedics.2026; 77: 124. CrossRef
Clinical and radiological outcomes following biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion: A comparative study of three interbody cage strategies Ju-Eun Kim, Hee Soo Kim, Daniel K. Park World Neurosurgery: X.2026; 31: 100604. CrossRef
Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Double-Cage Full Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Compared with Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion : A Retrospective Cohort Study Chi Ho Kim, Pius Kim, Chang Il Ju, Jong Hun Seo Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society.2026; 69(4): 596. CrossRef
Preoperative coronal magnetic resonance imaging: a critical evaluation of the Kambin’s triangle for the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedure Koopong Siribumrungwong, Bunyaporn Wuttiworawanit, Punnawit Pinitchanon, Chanon Chiarnpattanodom, Thongchai Suntharapa Asian Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Impact of endplate–graft geometric matching on cage subsidence following stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a finite element analysis Youchen Ye, Hao Li, Fangcai Li BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
3D-Printed Porous Titanium versus Polyetheretherketone Cages in Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial with Bone Mineral Density Stratification Jae-Won Shin, Mun-Su Park, Ji-Won Kwon, Sang-Ho Kim, Joonoh Seo, Hak-Sun Kim, Kyung-Soo Suk, Seong Hwan Moon, Si-Young Park, Byung Ho Lee The Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Risk factors influencing cage retropulsion following lumbar interbody fusion in treating degenerative lumbar diseases: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis Yong Liu, Hongyu Chen, Xiaoming Hu, Xiaokun Wu, Xiangui Yu, Hai Chen, Wenxiong Zhang, Limin Du Journal of Orthopaedic Science.2025; 30(5): 768. CrossRef
Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF) Versus Full-Endoscopic/Percutaneous TLIF With a Large-Footprint Interbody Cage: A Comparative Observational Study Christian Morgenstern, Francisco Nogueras, Geoffrey Delbos, Rudolf Morgenstern Global Spine Journal.2025; 15(6): 2910. CrossRef
Goutallier grading of psoas major and lumbar extensor muscles as a predictor of cage subsidence and reoperation following transforaminal and posterior lumbar interbody fusion Frank Vazquez, Alex Tang, Ara Khoylyan, Tan Chen The Spine Journal.2025; 25(11): 2514. CrossRef
In vitro comparison of endplate preparation in biportal endoscopic and microscopic tubular transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedures Min-Seok Kang, Samuel K. Cho, Samuel Q. Li, Fady Y. Hijji, Jun S. Kim, Sang-Min Park, Ki-Han You, Hyun-Jin Park The Spine Journal.2025; 25(10): 2326. CrossRef
Development and internal validation of a risk score for subsidence of expandable spacers in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery Martin N. Stienen, Lorenzo Bertulli, Linda Bättig, Yesim Yildiz, Gregor Fischer, Laurin Feuerstein, Francis Kissling, Thomas Schöfl, Felix C. Stengel, Felix Corr, Silvio Heinig, Nader Hejrati, Daniele Gianoli, Stefan Motov, Michael Betz, Benjamin Martens Brain and Spine.2025; 5: 104322. CrossRef
Novel Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy-Assisted Lumbar Fusion With Dual Hybrid Cage Insertion: A Technical Note With Case Presentation Jisoo Ha, Kuldeep Bansal, Chang-Wook Kim, Do-Hyoung Kim, Shreenidhi Kulkarni, Hee-Don Han Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique.2025; 10(2): 230. CrossRef
A Novel Switching Portal Technique in Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Notes and Comparative Outcomes Yun-Da Li, Chi-An Luo, Yung-Hsueh Hu, Wen-Chien Chen, Tsung-Ting Tsai, Po-Liang Lai, Tsai-Sheng Fu World Neurosurgery.2025; 203: 124511. CrossRef
Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using the Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cage: Technical Note and Case Illustration Tran Vu Hoang Duong, Phan Quang Son, Le Tan Bao, Luc Dinh Phuong, Phan Dinh Thanh Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique.2025; 10(2): 303. CrossRef
Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Using Cages With Different Sized Windows Chengkun Zhao, Shijie Wang, Jingjing Zhang, Hegang Niu, Yun Cao, Hui Tao, Cailiang Shen, Yinshun Zhang Spine.2025; 50(22): 1556. CrossRef
Comparative Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Banana-Shaped Versus Straight Cages in Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Cohort Study Nguyen Ngoc Thoi, Nguyen Le Hoang Tuan, Le Tuong Vien, Nguyen Thanh Nhan, Hoang Nguyen Anh Tuan, Nguyen Van Thanh, Tran Nguyen Phuong, Bui Hong Thien Khanh Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique.2025; 10(2): 172. CrossRef
Radiographic Analysis of Endplate Coverage of a 3-Dimensional-Expandable Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) Implant Compared to Static TLIF and Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Implants Jacob Mazza, Manhal Siddiqi, John Paul G. Kolcun, Dominick Richards, Richard G. Fessler Neurospine.2025; 22(4): 891. CrossRef
First
Prev
