Evidence Hub

Delta large-channel endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Rushuo Wei, Weiqiang Liu, Mingdong Yu, Yushan Zhu, Ruzhan Yao, Bing-Wu Wang, Jesse Li-Ling

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 2025

101 participants · 15 citations

Abstract

Delta large-channel endoscopy and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) are prominent minimally invasive techniques for treating lumbar spinal stenosis, known for minimal tissue damage, clear visualization, and quick recovery. However, rigorous controlled research comparing these procedures is scarce, necessitating further investigation into their respective complications and long-term effectiveness. This randomized controlled trial aims to compare their perioperative outcomes, focusing on postoperative recovery and complications over time. In total, 101 participants were randomly assigned to Delta large-channel endoscopy group (n = 50) or UBE group (n = 51). Primary measures were Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores and operation time. Secondary measures included VAS, EQ-5D, JOA scores, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay duration, and costs. Perioperative complications such as dural tears, incision infections, hematomas, thrombosis, and reoperation rates were recorded. The Delta group consistently showed lower mean ODI scores throughout the follow-up than UBE group, with significant differences at 2 weeks postoperative (P = 0.048), though they were not significant by 1 month (P = 0.124), 2 months (P = 0.821) and 3 months (P = 0.350). Operation times were shorter in the Delta group (P < 0.001). Hospitalization costs and intraoperative blood loss were slightly higher in the UBE group (P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted in the other secondary outcomes at…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 101 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free