Objective: This review aimed to synthesize and critically appraise the existing evidence on endoscopic-assisted anterior odontoid screw fixation, with the objectives of clarifying its current clinical utility and identifying priorities for future optimization of the technique. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines and registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD420251251051). Searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar identified studies reporting the use of endoscopic visualization during anterior odontoid screw placement. Eligible study designs included clinical reports and cadaveric investigations. Extracted data encompassed patient demographics, fracture subtype, operative technique, radiological alignment, fusion status, perioperative complications, and risk of bias, which was assessed using the modified Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 6 clinical reports and 2 cadaveric feasibility studies. The extent of endoscopic assistance ranged from hybrid mini-open approaches to fully endoscopic uniportal techniques. Reported fusion rates ranged from 80% to 100%, with fully endoscopic procedures demonstrating the most consistent radiological consolidation and anatomical reduction. No major neurovascular, aerodigestive, or implant-related complications were reported. Cadaveric evidence confirmed enhanced visualization of the C2 odontoid entry point and validated safe screw entry-point orientation with acceptable screw trajectories. Risk-of-bias assessment indicated low risk in 5 studies and moderate risk in 3. Small sample sizes, heterogeneous fracture morphology, and modest follow-up durations limited the overall quality of the evidence. Conclusion Endoscopic-assisted anterior odontoid screw fixation appears to be a technically feasible and biologically favorable minimally invasive option for selected odontoid fractures. Its potential advantages include improved visualization and reduced approach-related morbidity. Further prospective, multicenter investigations, particularly those integrating navigation systems, are required to define its definitive role in the management of cervical spine trauma.

Obesity presents significant challenges in spinal surgery, including higher rates of perioperative complications, prolonged operative times, and delayed recovery. Traditional open spine surgery often exacerbates these risks, particularly in patients with obesity, because of extensive tissue dissection and larger incisions. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive alternative, offering advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, minimal blood loss, lower infection rates, and faster recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of ESS techniques, including fully endoscopic and biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and decompression, in patients with obesity and lumbar spine pathologies. A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases yielded 2,975 studies published between 2000 and 2024, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in pain relief (Visual Analog Scale) and functional outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index), with comparable results between patients with and without obesity. Patients who are obese experienced longer operative times and have a slightly higher risk of symptom recurrence; however, ESS demonstrated lower rates of wound infections, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery than traditional surgery. These findings position ESS as a viable and effective option for managing lumbar spine conditions in patients with obesity, addressing obesity-related surgical challenges while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes. However, limitations such as study heterogeneity and the lack of randomized controlled trials highlight the need for further high-quality research to refine ESS techniques and optimize patient care in this high-risk population.

Obesity presents significant challenges in spinal surgery, including higher rates of perioperative complications, prolonged operative times, and delayed recovery. Traditional open spine surgery often exacerbates these risks, particularly in patients with obesity, because of extensive tissue dissection and larger incisions. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive alternative, offering advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, minimal blood loss, lower infection rates, and faster recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of ESS techniques, including fully endoscopic and biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and decompression, in patients with obesity and lumbar spine pathologies. A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases yielded 2,975 studies published between 2000 and 2024, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in pain relief (Visual Analog Scale) and functional outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index), with comparable results between patients with and without obesity. Patients who are obese experienced longer operative times and have a slightly higher risk of symptom recurrence; however, ESS demonstrated lower rates of wound infections, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery than traditional surgery. These findings position ESS as a viable and effective option for managing lumbar spine conditions in patients with obesity, addressing obesity-related surgical challenges while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes. However, limitations such as study heterogeneity and the lack of randomized controlled trials highlight the need for further high-quality research to refine ESS techniques and optimize patient care in this high-risk population.

Obesity presents significant challenges in spinal surgery, including higher rates of perioperative complications, prolonged operative times, and delayed recovery. Traditional open spine surgery often exacerbates these risks, particularly in patients with obesity, because of extensive tissue dissection and larger incisions. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive alternative, offering advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, minimal blood loss, lower infection rates, and faster recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of ESS techniques, including fully endoscopic and biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and decompression, in patients with obesity and lumbar spine pathologies. A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases yielded 2,975 studies published between 2000 and 2024, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in pain relief (Visual Analog Scale) and functional outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index), with comparable results between patients with and without obesity. Patients who are obese experienced longer operative times and have a slightly higher risk of symptom recurrence; however, ESS demonstrated lower rates of wound infections, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery than traditional surgery. These findings position ESS as a viable and effective option for managing lumbar spine conditions in patients with obesity, addressing obesity-related surgical challenges while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes. However, limitations such as study heterogeneity and the lack of randomized controlled trials highlight the need for further high-quality research to refine ESS techniques and optimize patient care in this high-risk population.

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a common health problem and a major cause of patient disability worldwide. The number of people with low back pain (LBP) and their years lived with disability are increasing despite technological advances. There remains a definitive gap between the evidence for effective management of CLBP and current practices. Degenerative disc disease is a major contributor to chronic back pain and also leads to activity limitation and work absence. CLBP is a complex, multidimensional condition yet to be fully understood. In many patients with LBP, magnetic resonance imaging scans show no obvious neural compression. Sensitized nociceptors within the posterior annulus have long been identified as a source of discogenic pain. However, the recent literature also supports the nociceptive capacity of the basiverterbal nerve, which carries vertebrogenic pain from the endplates. In degenerative disc disease, there is pathological neurotization of the sinuvertebral and basivertebral nerves due to stimulation of inflammatory pathways resulting from endplate damage. Radiofrequency ablation of the sinuvertebral nerve and basivertebral nerve provides effective and well-sustained pain relief to patients with LBP. The popularity of endoscopic spine surgery is increasing because of its magnified and clear visualization due to constant water irrigation. The objective of this manuscript is to provide a comprehensive review of discogenic pain, vertebrogenic pain, pathoanatomy, pathophysiology, and the pain generation pathways involved in degenerative disc disease and the role of endoscopic radiofrequency ablation in sinuvertebral and basivertebral neuropathy.

Lumbar canal stenosis (LCS) is a common degenerative pathology in middle-aged patients. Symptoms of LCS arise from compression of the traversing root due to narrowing of the lateral recess, which is attributed to hypertrophy of the ascending facet and thickened ligamentum flavum. Decompression of these structures is the main management goal for these patients. However, in patients with neurological deficits, recovery of motor weakness remains uncertain despite adequate decompression. We report a case of a 52-year-old female patient diagnosed with L4–5 LCS and right foot drop (L4:2/5, L5:0/5 Medical Research Council [MRC] grade) who underwent surgical decompression using unilateral biportal endoscopy. Intraoperatively, we observed that even after adequate decompression of the neural elements, there was persistent blanching of the L5 root. Upon further evaluation, we noted periradicular fibrous tissue encasing the L5 root. Careful removal of these fibrous tissues improved the vascular supply of the L5 root, demonstrating that the tissues had exerted a compressive effect on the nerve root. Postoperatively, motor power partially recovered (L4, L5: MRC grade 3/5) at the 6-week follow-up. Our case highlights the importance of careful attention to fibrous elements in the epidural space using endoscopy, which could enhance the overall outcomes following decompression in LCS.

Methods: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical evaluation were performed for patients with single-level uniportal endoscopic lumbar decompression with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Results: A total of 126 patients were recruited with a minimum follow-up of 26 months. The incidence of epidural fluid hematoma was 27%. Postoperative MRI revealed a significant improvement in the postoperative dura sac area at postoperative day 1 and at the upper endplate at 6 months in the hematoma cohort (39.69±15.72 and 26.89±16.58 mm2) as compared with the nonhematoma cohort (48.92±21.36 and 35.1±20.44 mm2), respectively (p <0.05); and at the lower endplate on postoperative 1 day in the hematoma cohort (51.18±24.69 mm2) compared to the nonhematoma cohort (63.91±27.92 mm2) (p <0.05). No significant difference was observed in the dura sac area at postoperative 1 year in both cohorts. The hematoma cohort had statistically significant higher postoperative 1-week Visual Analog Scale (VAS; 3.32±0.68) pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; 32.65±5.56) scores than the nonhematoma cohort (2.99±0.50 and 30.02±4.84, respectively; p <0.05). No significant difference was found at the final follow-up VAS, ODI, and MRI dura sac area. Conclusions Epidural fluid hematoma is a common early postoperative MRI finding in lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy with bilateral decompression. Conservative management is the preferred treatment option for patients who do not have a neurological deficit. Symptoms last only a few days and are self-limiting. A common endpoint is a remodeled fluid hematoma and the subsequent expansion of the dura sac area.