Abstract Objective: Compare the clinical effects of UBE and PELDin the treatment of lumbar disc herniation.Methods : Sixty-four patients who underwent single-segment lumbar disc herniation surgery from June 1, 2020 to December 30, 2020 in our hospital were randomly divided into UBE group and PELD group. Compare the perioperative period, follow-up and imaging data between the two groups.Results: Both groups of patients successfully completed the operation. The operation time in the UBE group was shorter, which was statistically significant (P＜0.05). There was no statistical difference in the number of intraoperative fluoroscopy between the two groups (P>0.05). One case of dural rupture in the UBE group was cured after symptomatic treatment . There was no statistical difference in postoperative hematoma between the two groups (P>0.05). The average hospital stay was shorter in the UBE group, which was statistically significant (P＜0.05). All patients were followed up for (13.5±2.4) months. There was no significant difference between the two groups before the operation, the second day, 1 month, and the last follow-up ODI (P>0.05) ). The VAS score at 2 days and 1 month after surgery was higher in the UBE group, which was statistically significant (P＜0.05). In terms of imaging, CT imaging measurements at different time points between the two groups were compared, and the height of the intervertebral space and the area of the spinal canal were not statistically significant (P＞0.05).Conclusions : Both UBE and PELD have good surgical results in the treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc herniation. However, the UBE operation time and average hospital stay are longer, and the postoperative wound pain is more obvious. PELD is more recommended.