Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Versus Interlaminar Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes, Quality of Life, and Surgical Selection Strategies

Background Transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD) and interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy (IELD) have emerged as primary minimally invasive treatments for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). However, comparative data regarding long-term quality of life (QoL) and specific patient-selection criteria remain fragmented. Objective This systematic review aims to compare the clinical outcomes, complications, and QoL metrics of TELD versus IELD to establish evidence-based surgical selection strategies. Methods Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for the period 2000–2025. We included randomized controlled trials and high-quality cohort studies with a minimum of 20 patients. Data from 31 high-quality studies involving 5,873 patients were reviewed and summarized narratively Registration: Not prospectively registered (PROSPERO). Results Both TELD and IELD showed superior results compared to open discectomy. Most studies reported comparable clinical outcomes between TELD and IELD, with some evidence suggesting marginal advantages for TELD in functional recovery scores. Complication rates were observed to be lower for endoscopic techniques compared to open surgery. Economic analyses across the reviewed literature indicated that both TELD and IELD are cost-effective, with values generally falling between $6,800 and $7,100 per QALY. Quality of life (QoL) metrics indicated IELD may offer a faster return to sexual activity due to minimal muscle stripping. Conclusion TELD and IELD are highly effective for LDH. While clinical outcomes are similar, TELD offers marginal advantages in functional recovery, whereas IELD is preferred for L5-S1 herniations. Selection should be tailored to the herniation level and the surgeon’s expertise.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Orthopedic Reviews
Published
2026-05-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.162151
Primary Topic
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Versus Interlaminar Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes, Quality of Life, and Surgical Selection Strategies

Ameer Neamah Saadoon Al-Mhemis, MOHAMMAD RIYAD ABDULWAHID AL-HASNAWI, Hinal Alkeshkumar Patel, Mohammed ali modher abduljaleel et al.
Orthopedic Reviews
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
article

Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Versus Interlaminar Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes, Quality of Life, and Surgical Selection Strategies

Ameer Neamah Saadoon Al-Mhemis, MOHAMMAD RIYAD ABDULWAHID AL-HASNAWI, Hinal Alkeshkumar Patel, Mohammed ali modher abduljaleel, Hadi Ali Hadi Dala Ali, Mustafa Faris Kadhim Kadhim, Oumaima Souilhi, Rasool Riyadh Abdulwahid Al Hasnawi
article en

Abstract

Background Transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD) and interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy (IELD) have emerged as primary minimally invasive treatments for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). However, comparative data regarding long-term quality of life (QoL) and specific patient-selection criteria remain fragmented. Objective This systematic review aims to compare the clinical outcomes, complications, and QoL metrics of TELD versus IELD to establish evidence-based surgical selection strategies. Methods Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for the period 2000–2025. We included randomized controlled trials and high-quality cohort studies with a minimum of 20 patients. Data from 31 high-quality studies involving 5,873 patients were reviewed and summarized narratively Registration: Not prospectively registered (PROSPERO). Results Both TELD and IELD showed superior results compared to open discectomy. Most studies reported comparable clinical outcomes between TELD and IELD, with some evidence suggesting marginal advantages for TELD in functional recovery scores. Complication rates were observed to be lower for endoscopic techniques compared to open surgery. Economic analyses across the reviewed literature indicated that both TELD and IELD are cost-effective, with values generally falling between $6,800 and $7,100 per QALY. Quality of life (QoL) metrics indicated IELD may offer a faster return to sexual activity due to minimal muscle stripping. Conclusion TELD and IELD are highly effective for LDH. While clinical outcomes are similar, TELD offers marginal advantages in functional recovery, whereas IELD is preferred for L5-S1 herniations. Selection should be tailored to the herniation level and the surgeon’s expertise.

Orthopedic ReviewsVol. 18
Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Government Medical College and Hospital (IN), Hospital General de Almansa (ES), First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University (CN), Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University (CN), Xi'an Jiaotong University (CN)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.