“…The evolution from posterior open cervical foraminotomy to tubular, microendoscopic, and FESS, is associated with advantages, such as less surgical muscle aggression, a smaller incision, shorter hospital stay, less postoperative pain, and a shorter rehabilitation time [43], as traditional open cervical laminectomy is correlated with the possibility of instability and delayed kyphosis [40,[44][45][46]. Another advantage of full-endoscopic cervical spine surgery is the continuous saline irrigation, which can lead to the reduction of inflammatory agents and thus less intraoperative bleeding, resulting in a lower risk of dural tears due to the clear surgical field [47,48]. Although biomechanical and clinical studies comparing these techniques to traditional open techniques in terms of long-term outcomes have not been performed, reports in the literature from other segments of the spine suggest that the risk of infection after decompressions, length of hospital stay, risk of kyphosis increase, secondary need for fusion, and postoperative narcotic dependence is reduced [40].…”