Spinal fusion techniques differed in recovery measures and operating time
A review favored biportal endoscopic fusion on several recovery measures, but operations took longer and complication rates did not differ significantly.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
Across included comparisons, ULIF was associated with less bleeding during surgery, earlier walking and shorter hospital stays than MIS-TLIF. Pain and disability scores also favored ULIF at final follow-up, but operations took longer. Disc height, lower-spine curvature, fusion rates and complication rates did not differ significantly; that does not establish equivalent outcomes or safety.
The abstract omits units for several pooled differences, follow-up lengths and details of study designs or bias. These gaps limit judgments about clinical importance and the strength of comparisons.
What researchers found
Intraoperative blood loss
Compared with MIS-TLIF during surgery, pooled blood loss was significantly lower with ULIF; measurement units are omitted from the abstract.
What the review compared
The researchers asked how the surgical approaches compared for single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis. Their assessment covered events during surgery, early recovery, pain, disability, fusion and complications, giving several different views of treatment outcomes.
Score differences need context
Back pain, leg pain and disability scores favored ULIF at the last assessment. The abstract does not state how large a score change patients would notice, so statistical significance alone cannot establish a meaningful recovery advantage.
The original publication
Unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zhang Y, Ju J, Wu J
Front Med (Lausanne) · 2025
- PubMed ID
- 41368315
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.