Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

A Systematic Review of Complication Management During Uniportal and Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Dural Tear and Bleeding

  • Siravich Suvithayasiri
  • , Ju Eun Kim
  • , Facundo Van Isseldyk
  • , Marcus Serra
  • , Christopher Martin
  • , Viswanadha Arunkumar
  • , Sotirios Veranis
  • , Prashanth Rao
  • , Enrico Giordan
  • , Piya Chavalparit
  • , Nelson Astur
  • , Samuel Cho
  • , Jin Sung Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Study Design: Systematic Review and Narrative Review. Objective: To evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and management strategies for iatrogenic dural tears and to provide a narrative review of intraoperative bleeding management during uniportal and biportal endoscopic spine surgery (ESS). Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines using PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies published between January 1990 and August 2025. Eligible studies included English-language clinical investigations involving degenerative spinal pathology treated with full-endoscopic or unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) techniques. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-E tool. Data on dural tear incidence and management were systematically synthesized, while bleeding control strategies were addressed through a structured narrative review of the technical literature. Results: Nineteen studies including 10 578 patients were analyzed. The incidence of incidental durotomy ranged from 0.54% to 13.2%. Revision surgery was the strongest predictor of dural tears, followed by lumbar spinal stenosis and surgeon learning curve. Management strategies were stratified by defect size and containment: small tears were treated conservatively or with sealants; intermediate defects with patch techniques; and large or uncontained defects with endoscopic suturing or non-penetrating clips. The biportal approach facilitated complex dural repair. Bleeding management emphasized a prevention-first strategy focused on hemodynamic control, hydrostatic tamponade, and targeted use of radiofrequency and topical hemostatic agents. Conclusion: Effective complication management in ESS requires adaptation to the hydrostatic environment. A stratified algorithm allows safe dural repair, while structured bleeding control is essential for maintaining visualization and surgical safety.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalGlobal Spine Journal
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2026

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2026. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

Keywords

  • biportal endoscopic
  • bleeding
  • complications
  • dural tear
  • endoscopic spine surgery
  • full-endoscopic
  • hemostasis
  • systematic review

PubMed: MeSH publication types

  • Journal Article

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A Systematic Review of Complication Management During Uniportal and Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Dural Tear and Bleeding'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this