Basivertebral Nerve Radiofrequency Ablation (Intracept): Procedural Technique.

Intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation is indicated for the treatment of chronic vertebrogenic low back pain with failure of at least 6 months of conservative treatment. This article details patient positioning and setup, step-by-step instructions for the procedure, and postoperative management. Pearls and pitfalls are also discussed. In addition, an instructional procedure video accompanies this paper and can be found online (at https://vimeo.com/791578426/de0e90cfbe).

Association between physical measures of spinopelvic alignment and physical functioning with patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) after total hip arthroplasty: Protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Prevalence of total hip arthroplasty (THA) has trended upwards over past decades and is projected to increase further. Optimizing outcomes after surgery is essential to avoid surgical revision and maximize outcomes. Low back pain is reported as a problem post THA. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used to evaluate THA outcomes but have limitations (e.g., ceiling effects). It is therefore important to assess a comprehensive range of outcomes. Physical outcome measures of spinopelvic alignment and physical functioning demonstrate potential value, but no evidence synthesis has investigated their association with PROMs. The objectives of this systematic review are to evaluate the association between spinopelvic alignment and physical outcome measures of physical functioning with PROMs and characteristics of low back pain after THA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol is aligned with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. Cross-sectional and longitudinal cohort studies evaluating the association between the physical outcome measures and PROMs (any outcome measures reported) following THA by any approach/implant will be included except surface replacement and revision THA. Studies investigating THA for developmental pathology and inflammatory conditions will be excluded. A systematic search in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and the grey literature will be carried out from inception to July 31, 2023. Two independent reviewers will evaluate eligibility of retrieved articles, extract data and assess risk of bias (NIH quality assessment tool) of included studies. A third reviewer will mediate disagreements. Random-effects meta-analyses will be conducted if studies are sufficiently homogeneous in design, population, physical measures and PROMs; reporting odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Where meta-analyses are not possible, a narrative synthesis will be conducted. Confidence in cumulative evidence will be assessed using a modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO Registration number CRD42023412744.

A Comparative Study of Endoscopic versus Percutaneous Epidural Neuroplasty in Lower Back Pain: Outcomes at Six-Month Follow Up.

Background and Objectives: Endoscopic epidural neuroplasty (EEN) facilitates adhesiolysis through direct epiduroscopic visualization, offering more precise neural decompression than that exhibited by percutaneous epidural neuroplasty (PEN). We aimed to compare the effects of EEN and PEN for 6 months after treatment with lower back and radicular pain in patients. Methods: This retrospective study compared the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores in patients with low back and radicular pain who underwent EEN or PEN with a steering catheter. The medical records of 107 patients were analyzed, with 73 and 34 undergoing EEN and PEN, respectively. Results: The VAS and ODI scores decreased at all time points after EEN and PEN. VAS and ODI scores decreased more in the EEN group than those in the PEN group at 1 day and 1- and 6-months post-procedure, indicating superior pain relief for both lower back and radicular pain through EEN. Conclusions: EEN is a superior treatment of pain control than PEN in lower back and radicular pain patients.

[Progress of intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation for symptomatic Modic alterations].

Chronic lumbar and back pain caused by degenerative vertebral endplates presents a challenging issue for patients and clinicians. As a new minimally invasive spinal treatment method, radiofrequency ablation of vertebral basal nerve in bone can denature the corresponding vertebral basal nerve through radiofrequency ablation of degenerative vertebral endplate. It blocks the nociceptive signal transmission of the vertebral base nerve, thereby alleviating the symptoms of low back pain caused by the degenerative vertebral endplate. At present, many foreign articles have reported the operation principle, operation method, clinical efficacy and related complications of radiofrequency ablation of the vertebral basal nerve. The main purpose of this paper is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the current relevant research, and provide a reference for the follow-up clinical research.

Basivertebral nerve ablation with concurrent lumbar laminotomy.

Lumbar radiculopathy due to impingement of nerve roots from facet hypertrophy and/or disc herniation can often coincide with vertebrogenic low back pain. This is demonstrated on MRI with foraminal stenosis and Modic changes. We examine the potential of using a combination of basivertebral nerve ablation (BVNA) and lumbar laminotomy as an alternative to traditional spinal fusion in specific patient populations. This unique combination of surgical techniques has not been previously reported in the medical literature. We report a man in his late 30s with chronic low back pain and lumbar radiculopathy, treated with BVNA and concurrent laminotomy. The patient reported progressive improvements in his mobility and pain over the next 2 years. We discuss the advantages of using this technique for lumbar radiculopathy and Modic changes compared with conventional surgical modalities.

[Comparison of effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic and uniportal interlaminar endoscopic decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis].

Objective: To compare the effectiveness between unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression (ULBD) with unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) and uniportal interlaminar endoscopy (UIE) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods: A clinical data of 52 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, who met the selection criteria and treated with ULBD between March 2021 and November 2022, was retrospectively analyzed. The patients were allocated into UBE group (23 cases) and UIE group (29 cases) according to the surgical methods. There was no significant difference ( P>0.05) in age, gender, body mass index, surgical segment, type of lumbar stenosis, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), disc height, and dural sac area between the two groups. Perioperative indexes (incision length, operation time, hospital stay, and surgical complications), clinical indicators (VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, and ODI before operation and at 3 days, 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months after operation), and imaging indicators (disc height and dural sac area before operation and at 1, 12 months after operation, and dural sac expansion area) were recorded and compared between the two group. Results: All operations in both groups were successfully completed. Compared with the UIE group, the UBE group had shorter operation time and longer incision length, with significant differences ( P<0.05). But there was no significant difference in hospital stay and incidence of complications between the two groups ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12-20 months (mean, 14 months). The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain and ODI after operation significantly improved when compared with preoperative values ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in the above indicators between different time points after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups at different time points ( P>0.05). Imaging examination showed that there was no significant difference in disc height between the two groups at different time points after operation ( P>0.05). However, the dural sac area and dural sac expansion area were significantly larger in the UBE group than in the UIE group ( P<0.05). Conclusion: ULBD with UBE and UIE can achieve satisfactory effectiveness in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. But the former has more thorough decompression and better dural sac expansion than the latter.

Disc herniation associated with butterfly vertebra anomaly.

Butterfly vertebra anomaly is a rare condition where the vertebral body fails to fuse during embryogenesis. In this case report, we present a 32-year-old male with progressive lower back pain and paralysis in both lower extremities. CT- and MR-scan showed an isolated L3 butterfly vertebra with a fusion of L2 and L3 discus through the defect and a discus prolapse compressing the spinal canal. The patient underwent successful decompressive surgery and experienced relief in symptoms post-operatively.

Retrospective Study to Compare the Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Microscopic Unilateral Laminotomy with Microscopic Bilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression in the Early Postoperative Period in 142 Patients with Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

BACKGROUND We aimed to compare the effectiveness of microscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) and microscopic bilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (BLBD) in the early postoperative period among patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with LSS who underwent ULBD or BLBD between January 2020 and December 2023, including 94 patients who underwent ULBD and 58 who underwent BLBD. Patient demographics, comorbidities, smoking status, and data related to LSS were reviewed. Preoperative and postoperative assessments on day 10 included back pain visual analog scale (VAS), walking distance, and Odom criteria. Disability was evaluated using the self-assessment Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) preoperatively and on day 30. Additionally, wound infection, postoperative modified MacNab criteria, and pain (back, leg, and hip) were recorded. RESULTS Age and sex were similar in the 2 groups. Both surgeries significantly reduced low back pain, increased walking distance, and improved Odom category on day 10, compared with baseline (P<0.001 for all). A significant decrease in 30-day ODI, compared with baseline, was observed in both groups (P<0.001 for both). The ULBD group had a significantly higher percentage of patients with wound infection (P=0.014); however, the ODI score among ULBD recipients was significantly lower (better) on day 30 (P=0.047). CONCLUSIONS ULBD may represent a less invasive, more effective, and safer surgical alternative than BLBD and classical laminectomy in patients with single-level LSS, but precautions are essential concerning wound infection.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Ablation of the Sacroiliac Joint.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To evaluate the effectiveness of radiofrequency neurotomy in managing sacroiliac joint pain utilizing a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. RECENT FINDINGS: The prevalence of sacroiliac joint pain is estimated at around 25% of low back pain cases, and its diagnosis lacks a gold standard. Treatments include exercise therapy, injections, ablation, and fusion, with variable effectiveness. COVID-19 altered utilization patterns of interventions, including sacroiliac joint procedures, and the evidence for these interventions remains inconclusive. Recently, Medicare has issued its local coverage determinations (LCDs) in the United States, which provides noncoverage of sacroiliac joint radiofrequency neurotomy. Additionally, a recent systematic review of sacroiliac joint injections showed Level III or fair evidence. The sacroiliac joint, a critical axial joint linking the spine and pelvis, contributes to low back pain. Its complex innervation pattern varies among individuals. Sacroiliac joint dysfunction, causing pain and stiffness, arises from diverse factors.The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate radiofrequency neurotomy's effectiveness for sacroiliac joint pain management by applying rigorous methodology, considering both RCTs and observational studies. Despite methodological disparities, the evidence from this review, supported by changes in pain scores and functional improvement, suggests Level III evidence with fair recommendation for radiofrequency neurotomy as a treatment option. The review's strengths include its comprehensive approach and quality assessment. However, limitations persist, including variations in criteria and technical factors, underscoring the need for further high-quality studies in real-world scenarios.

Middle cluneal nerve entrapment sites in the surgical field.

INTRODUCTION: Middle cluneal nerve (MCN) entrapment around the sacroiliac joint elicits low back pain (LBP). For surgical decompression to be successful, the course of the MCN must be known. We retrospectively studied the MCN course in 15 patients who had undergone MCN neurolysis. METHODS: Enrolled in this retrospective study were 15 patients (18 sides). We inspected their surgical records and videos to determine the course of the entrapped MCN. The area between the posterior superior- and the posterior inferior iliac spine was divided into areas A-D from the rostral side. The MCN transit points were identified at the midline and the lateral edge connecting the posterior superior- and posterior inferior iliac spine. Before and 6 months after surgery, the patients recorded the degree of LBP on the numerical rating scale and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. RESULTS: We decompressed 24 MCNs. The mean number was 1.3 nerves per patient (range 1-2). The MCN course was oblique in the cranio-caudal direction; the nerve tended to be observed in areas C and D. In six patients (40%), we detected two MCN branches, they were in the same area and adjacent. Postoperatively, LBP was improved significantly in all patients. CONCLUSION: Between the posterior superior- and the posterior inferior iliac spine, the MCN ran obliquely in the cranio-caudal direction; it was prominent in areas on the caudal side. In six (40%) patients, we decompressed two adjacent MCNs. Our findings are useful for MCN decompression surgery.

Conjoined lumbosacral nerve root: a case report.

BACKGROUND: In patients with conjoined nerve roots, hemilaminectomy with sufficient exposure of the intervertebral foramen or lateral recess is required to prevent destabilization and ensure correct mobility of the lumbosacral spine. To the best of our knowledge, no case reports have detailed the long-term course of conjoined nerve roots after surgery. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of a 51-year-old Japanese man with a conjoined nerve root. The main symptoms were acute low back pain, radiating pain, and right leg muscle weakness. Partial laminectomy was performed with adequate exposure to the conjoined nerve root. The symptoms completely resolved immediately after surgery. However, the same symptoms recurred 7 years postoperatively. The nerve root was compressed because of foraminal stenosis resulting from L5-S disc degeneration. L5-S transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion was performed on the contralateral side because of an immobile conjoined nerve root. At 44 months after the second surgery, the patient had no low back pain or radiating pain, and the muscle weakness in the right leg had improved. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of the long-term course of conjoined nerve root after partial laminectomy. When foraminal stenosis occurs after partial laminectomy, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion from the contralateral side may be required because of an immobile conjoined nerve root.

Confirmatory study of the usefulness of quantum molecular resonance and microdissectomy for the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy in a prospective cohort at 6 months follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: Low back pain is a common musculoskeletal complaint and while prognosis is usually favorable, some patients experience persistent pain despite conservative treatment and invasive treatment to target the root cause of the pain may be necessary. The aim of this study is to evaluate patient outcomes after treatment of lumbar radiculopathy (LR) with quantum molecular resonance radiofrequency coblation disc decompression and percutaneous microdiscectomy with grasper forceps (QMRG). METHODS: This prospective cohort study was carried out in two Spanish hospitals on 58 patients with LR secondary to a contained hydrated lumbar disc hernia or lumbar disc protrusion of more than 6 months of evolution, which persisted despite conservative treatment with analgesia, rehabilitation, and physiotherapy, and/or epidural block, in the previous 2 years. Patients were treated with QMRG and the outcomes were measured mainly using the Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions, Numeric Rating Scale, Oswestry Disability Index, SF12: Short Form 12 Health Survey, Patient Global Impression of Improvement, Clinical Global Impression of Improvement, and Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale. RESULTS: Patients who received QMRG showed significant improvement in their baseline scores at 6 months post-treatment. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold was met by 26-98% of patients, depending on the outcome measure, for non-sleep-related outcomes, and between 17 and 62% for sleep-related outcome measures. Of the 14 outcome measures studied, at least 50% of the patients met the MCID threshold in 8 of them. CONCLUSION: Treatment of LR with QMRG appears to be effective at 6 months post-intervention.

Multifidus lesions: A possible pathological component in patients with low back pain after posterior lumbar surgery.

There are few histological studies on multifidus after lumbar surgery, and it is not clear whether multifidus changes affect the clinical outcome after lumbar surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between multifidus changes and clinical outcomes after lumbar surgery. Patients underwent internal fixation removal after lumbar posterior surgery were enrolled. Patients were divided into a low back pain (LBP) group (n = 15) and a non-low back pain (non-LBP) group (n = 10).The Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) were completed. 18 patients with lumbar fracture surgery were included as the control group. Multifidus morphological changes were observed by hematoxylin and eosin and Masson staining. The expression of TGF-ß1 was observed by immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence and Western blot. The cross-sectional area (CSA) of the multifidus in the non-LBP group and the control group were greater than those in the LBP group. TGF-ß1 expression and gray value ratio in the non-LBP group and the control group were lower than those in the LBP group. The multifidus CSA and TGF-ß1 expression in multifidus were strongly correlated with ODI and VAS. Patients with LBP after posterior lumbar surgery suffered from atrophy and fibrosis lesions in the multifidus, and the degree of multifidus lesions was closely related to dysfunction and pain, which might be one of the causes of LBP after posterior lumbar surgery.

[Comparison of effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion for degree â degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis].

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) in the treatment of degreeⅠdegenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Methods: A clinical data of 58 patients with degreeⅠDLS who met the selection criteria between October 2021 and October 2022 was retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 28 cases were treated with unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression (decompression group) and 30 cases with ULIF (ULIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups ( P>0.05) in the gender, age, lesion segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), disk height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), and other baseline data. The operation time, postoperative drainage volume, postoperative ambulation time, VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, ODI, laboratory examination indexes (CRP, ESR), and imaging parameters (DH, SL) were compared between the two groups. Results: Compared with the ULIF group, the decompression group had shorter operation time, less postoperative drainage, and earlier ambulation ( P<0.05). All incisions healed by first intention, and no complication such as nerve root injury, epidural hematoma, or infection occurred. All patients were followed up 12 months. Laboratory tests showed that ESR and CRP at 3 days after operation in decompression group were not significantly different from those before operation ( P>0.05), while the above indexes in ULIF group significantly increased at 3 days after operation compared to preoperative values ( P<0.05). There were significant differences in the changes of ESR and CRP before and after operation between the two groups ( P<0.05). Except that the VAS score of low back pain at 3 days after operation was not significantly different from that before operation in decompression group ( P>0.05), there were significant differences in VAS score of low back pain and VAS score of leg pain between the two groups at other time points ( P<0.05). The VAS score of low back pain in ULIF group was significantly higher than that in decompression group at 3 days after operation ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in VAS score of low back pain and VAS score of leg pain between the two groups at other time points ( P>0.05). The ODI of the two groups significantly improved after operation ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between 3 days and 6 months after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups at the two time points after operation ( P<0.05). Imaging examination showed that there was no significant difference in DH and SL between pre-operation and 12 months after operation in decompression group ( P>0.05). However, the above two indexes in ULIF group were significantly higher than those before operation ( P<0.05). There were significant differences in the changes of DH and SL before and after operation between the two groups ( P<0.05). Conclusion: Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression can achieve good effectiveness in the treatment of degree Ⅰ DLS. Compared with ULIF, it can shorten operation time, reduce postoperative drainage volume, promote early ambulation, reduce inflammatory reaction, and accelerate postoperative recovery. ULIF has more advantages in restoring intervertebral DH and SL.

Identification and decompression of superior cluneal nerve implicated in low back pain.

INTRODUCTION: Low back pain (LBP) can be attributable to entrapment of the superior cluneal nerve (SCN) around the iliac crest. Surgical decompression is a useful treatment; however, finding all entrapped SCNs involved in patients with LBP can be difficult. We performed a retrospective study to help identify entrapped SCNs in the narrow surgical field. METHODS: We enrolled 20 LBP patient (22 sides) with SCN entrapment. They were 9 males and 11 females; their mean age was 72.5 years. We developed a 3-step procedure for successful SCN decompression surgery. In step 1, the thoracolumbar fascia is exposed and the SCN penetrating the fascia is released. In step 2, the fascia is opened and the SCN is released. In step 3, the fascia above the iliac crest is opened and the SCN is released. RESULTS: We successfully released 66 nerves; the average was 3.0 ± 0.8 (1-4) per patient. Step 1 detected 18 nerves (27.3%), step 2 identified 35 (53.0%), and in step 3, 13 (19.7%) were recognized. By tracing the thin nerves branching off the SCN, we found 7 nerves (10.6%). We performed 22 operations; step 1 identified 16 SCNs (72.7%), step 2 identified 21 (95.5%), and step 3 found 12 nerves (54.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The SCN is most readily identified upon opening of the thoracolumbar fascia. To identify as many SCN branches as possible, our 3-step method may be useful.

Navigated Simultaneous Lateral Minimally Invasive Tubular and Posterior Mini-Open Access for Removal and Revision of Triangular Sacroiliac Joint Implants: A Technical Note.

BACKGROUND: Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion, to treat back pain caused by SIJ dysfunction, can employ open or minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques and either cylindrical (screw-shaped) or triangular (wedge-shaped) implants. Fusion nonunion sometimes explains recurrent SIJ pain following fusion and occasionally requires hardware revision. MIS revision minimizes patient pain, infection, and disability, but due to the triangular implant size and form factor, implant removal can present challenges for MIS access during the explantation and achieving good bony purchase for reinstrumentation. Here, we report a prone single-position lateral MIS/posterior mini-open procedure for triangular-implant SIJ fusion revision. METHODS: The patient is a 72-year-old female who underwent right SIJ fusion for lower back and leg pain sustained after a fall 2 years prior but experienced recurrent pain over the subsequent 2 years, with imaging findings of right SIJ peri-hardware lucencies and diagnostic injections confirming persistent right-sided sacroiliitis. RESULTS: The patient underwent hardware removal using the lateral MIS incision with table-mounted tubular access and image-guided navigation to maintain exposure, plus simultaneous reinstrumentation using a navigated S2-alar-iliac screw and iliac bolt construct with connecting rod through the posterior mini-open incision made for the navigation reference frame spinous process clamp. CONCLUSIONS: The use of navigation and MIS access can significantly decrease the complexity of lateral hardware removal, and mini-open navigated screw-and-rod constructs offer reinstrumentation options accessible to surgeons unfamiliar with specialized posterior SIJ systems.

Effect of revision sacroiliac joint fusion on unresolved pain and disability: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: The sacroiliac (SI) joint is recognized as a source of low back pain in 15-30% of patients. Though randomized controlled trials have shown clinical improvement following SI joint fusion in 83.1% of patients, revision rates of 2.9% within 2 years have been reported. There is a paucity of literature reviewing this small yet significant population of patients requiring revision surgery. METHODS: Following IRB approval, retrospective review of patients, who underwent a revision SI joint fusion from 2009 to 2021 was completed. Patient-reported outcomes were measured before and at each clinic visit after surgery with visual analoge scale (VAS) for back pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Patient characteristics (chronic opiate use and prior lumbar fusion) and surgical factors (operative approach, type/number of implants and use of bone graft) were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated with Paired t and Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression determined if patients met the minimally clinical important differences (MCID) for VAS-back pain and ODI scores at 1 year. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients (77% female) with an average age of 49.1 (SD ± 11.1) years met inclusion criteria. Forty-four had single sided revisions and eight bilateral revisions. At 1 year follow-up there was no significant improvement in VAS-Back (p = 0.06) or ODI (p = 0.06). Patients with chronic opioid use were 8.5 times less likely to achieve the MDC for ODI scores (OR 0.118, p = 0.029). There was no difference in outcomes when comparing the different surgical approaches (p = 0.41). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates patients undergoing revision surgery have moderate improvement in low back pain, however, few have complete resolution of their symptoms. Specific patient factors, such as chronic opiate use and female sex may decrease the expected improvement in patient-reported outcomes following surgery. Failure to obtain relief may be due to incorrect indications, lack of biologic fusion and/or presence of co-pathologies. Further clinical examination and consistent long-term follow-up, clarify the role revision surgery plays in long-term patient outcomes.

[Clinical study of lumbar stability after unilateral biportal endoscopy in the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases].

Objectives: To investigate the clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) in the treatment of degenerative lumbar disease (DLD) and its impact on postoperative lumbar stability. Methods: This is a retrospective case series study. A total of 109 cases of DLD treated with UBE in the Department of Orthopaedic, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University from July 2020 to June 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. There were 47 males and 62 females, aged (53.3±8.2) years (range: 21 to 80 years). The surgical segments were single segment in 80 cases, two segments in 25 cases, and three segments in 4 cases. The low back pain and leg pain of visual analogue scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were evaluated before and after operation. The modified MacNab criteria were used for evaluation of the clinical consequences. Postoperative three-dimensional lumbar CT was performed to observe the preservation of the facet joints and the angle of the medial surface of the facetectomy(ß angle). At 12 months after surgery, X ray of the flexion and extension lumbar spine were reviewed. The comparison and analysis of the data were conducted using paired sample t tests or generalized estimation equations. Results: All 109 patients underwent operative procedures successfully. The operation time was (94.5±37.1) minutes (range:56 to 245 minutes), the times of X ray was 6.8±4.0 (range:4 to 16 times), and the days of hospitalization was (5.3±3.7) days (range:4 to 14 days). Complications included dural tears in 4 cases, transient lower limb numbness in 4 cases, epidural hematoma in 2 case. The follow-up time was (19.6±7.2) months (range:12 to 36 months). The postoperative low back pain VAS, leg pain VAS, JOA score and ODI were significantly improved(all P<0.05). According to the modified MacNab criteria, the excellent and good rate was 88.99%(97/109) at 12 months after surgery. One case underwent revision surgery because of recurrent lumbar disc herniation. In term of radiographic evaluation, the area of the surgical side facet joints after UBE surgery was reserved more than 60%. The ß angle was less than 90° in all patients. After 12 months of surgery, there was no surgical segment instability or spondylolisthesis by the X-ray of the flexion and extension lumbar spine. Conclusion: UBE can achieve satisfactory clinical efficacy in the treatment of DLD, and maintain the stability of the lumbar spine.