Clinical Outcomes and Complications of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With a Comparison to Full-Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy
	    		
		   		
		   			
		   		
	    	
    	- Author:
	        		
		        		
		        		
			        		Sang Hyub LEE
			        		
			        		
			        		
			        			1
			        			
			        		
			        		
			        		
			        		
			        		;
		        		
		        		
		        		
			        		Junghan SEO
			        		
			        		;
		        		
		        		
		        		
			        		Dain JEONG
			        		
			        		;
		        		
		        		
		        		
			        		Jin Seop HWANG
			        		
			        		;
		        		
		        		
		        		
			        		Jae-Won JANG
			        		
			        		;
		        		
		        		
		        		
			        		Yong Eun CHO
			        		
			        		;
		        		
		        		
		        		
			        		Dong-Geun LEE
			        		
			        		;
		        		
		        		
		        		
			        		Choon Keun PARK
			        		
			        		
		        		
		        		
		        		
			        		
			        		Author Information
			        		
 - Publication Type:Original Article
 - From: Neurospine 2024;21(3):807-819
 - CountryRepublic of Korea
 - Language:English
 - 
		        	Abstract:
			       	
			       		
				        
				        	 Objective:The unilateral biportal endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (UBE-PCF) has been recently adopted for unilateral radiating arm pain due to cervical herniated intervertebral disc or foraminal stenosis. We systematically meta-analyzed clinical outcomes and complications of the UBE-PCF and compared them with those of full-endoscopic PCF (FE-PCF). 
				        	
Methods:We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science until February 29, 2024. Clinical outcomes and complications of the UBE-PCF and FE-PCF were collected and analyzed using the fixed-effect or random-effects model. Clinical outcomes of the UBE-PCF were compared with minimal clinically important difference (MCID) following PCF to evaluate the efficacy of UBE-PCF.
Results:Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. In the random-effects meta-analysis, the Neck Disability Index (NDI), visual analogue scale (VAS) neck, and VAS arm were significantly decreased after the UBE-PCF (p<0.001). The improvement of NDI, VAS neck, and VAS arm were significantly higher than MCID (p<0.05). The improvement of NDI, VAS neck, and VAS arm were not significantly different between the UBE-PCF and FE-PCF (p>0.05). Overall incidence of complications of the UBE-PCF was 6.2% (24 of 390). The most common complication was dura tear (2.1%, 8 of 390). The incidence in overall complications was not significantly different between the UBE-PCF and FE-PCF (p=0.813).
Conclusion:We found that the UBE-PCF significantly improved clinical outcomes. Regarding clinical outcomes and complications, the UBE-PCF and FE-PCF were not significantly different. Therefore, the UBE-PCF would be an advantageous surgical option comparable to FE-PCF for unilateral radiating arm pain. 
            