I am involved in minimally invasive spine surgery, and I am often asked this question by my patients and friends. It is also a rather complex issue, even debated by spine surgeons, but I will choose some accepted ideas for your reference: First, the advantages of minimally invasive spine: (1) Less surgical trauma: Compared with conventional open surgery, minimally invasive spine surgery has smaller incisions and significantly less damage to the paravertebral muscles. (2) Satisfactory outcome: for suitable patients, the outcome is higher than that of open surgery, with an excellent rate of over 85%. (3) Quick recovery, with 1 minute to get off the floor after doing so. (4) Surgical bleeding is very low and can be considered negligible. (5) Small skin incision (6 mm), more aesthetic. (6) Short hospitalization time, discharged the same day, hospitalization only a few hours. (7) Easier to remedy in case of disease recurrence and reoccurrence, and even remedy the problem of open surgery. Regarding the procedure, we use a minimally invasive method called intervertebral foraminoscopy, which, like a missile, under fluoroscopy, very precisely, reaches a tube as thick as a girl’s pinky finger (6 mm in diameter) right to the location of the herniated disc and removes the tissue that is compressing the nerve. This is approximately the procedure. Local anesthesia surgery. A half-day hospital stay is required, and most patients go home the same day. The patient is awake during the operation and needs to communicate and talk with the surgeon. Again, the disadvantages: (1) The risks of minimally invasive surgery are comparable to those of standard open surgery; minimally invasive but not less dangerous. (2) The disc cannot be completely removed and the possibility of recurrence exists. In summary, minimally invasive surgery for lumbar disc herniation, as a surgical ladder treatment, has very obvious advantages and broad application prospects. It is important to understand that this technique is a way to gain time with symptom relief and delay lumbar fusion surgery as much as possible. It is important to understand that this method, although good, cannot magically reverse the physiological process of lumbar spine degeneration, but only relieve pain. It is important to understand that this technique can only be applied to certain conditions and the indications should be grasped, and not all lumbar spine diseases can be treated with this method. Some people have said that “minimally invasive” is very appealing from the wording, “minimally invasive means very small trauma, very small means negligible, negligible means no risk”, and I believe that some patients have had this idea to understand minimally invasive, or apprehensively hoping to get such an answer from the doctor. If the doctor in some hospitals gives a positive answer (minimally invasive is possible), you will gladly agree to choose minimally invasive surgery, and some patients who should have undergone conventional surgery even choose “minimally invasive surgery” because they are worried about the risks of conventional surgery, and the results are not satisfactory, and the best time for surgery is lost, or even They may even be deceived. I would like to emphasize that the focus of minimally invasive surgery is to solve the symptoms, for example, leg pain, but only to remove the herniated disc and reduce the nerve compression, because the damaged disc is not completely removed, so there is a possibility of recurrence. In contrast, the focus of standard fusion surgery is on complete removal of all the discs, and because the removal is so complete, the structure has to be destroyed a little, so most of them need to be fixed with internal fixation. All things are fair in this world. There are some conditions where a minimally invasive approach is not recommended, i.e., minimally invasive generally addresses minor local problems and cannot treat back pain, spinal stenosis and slippage. At such times, we should find a method that will solve the patient’s problem. Instead, the concept of minimally invasive is hyped. At this time, the doctor and the patient have to communicate fully and work closely together in order to choose the right method that will make the patient get a good result. The doctor should start from the idea of serving the people and suggest with a scientific and fair mind, while the patient, not to be overly superstitious about the slogan of minimally invasive, should choose realistically.