Aim:Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion(ACDF) has become the standard surgical treatment of cervical disc hernias(CDH), however, its complications including dysphagia, recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, pseudoarthrosis, implants and graft problems, adjacent segment disease have been well-known.Posterior cervical discectomy(PCD) via posterior keyhole lamino-foraminotomy may be a solution to avoid from these complications. We report the clinical outcomes of microdiscectomy(MD) and endoscope assisted discectomy(EAD) techniques via the posterior approach in patients with CDH.Material and Methods:The data were obtained from retrospective review of the patient’s charts and the latest follow-up examination.Results:A total of 83 cases with CDH who were treated by PCD performed between 2010 and 2019 were reviewed.MD was used in 42 patients with a mean age of 51.1 years; 20 were male. All had pain, 26 had additional weakness. In MD group, VAS score for neck was 7.72, for arm 8.83; PROLO score was 7.41.EAD was used in 41 patients with a mean age of 38.7 years; 26 were male. All had pain, 20 had additional weakness. In EAD group, VAS score for neck was 7.75, for arm 8,72; PROLO score was 7,44.Mean follow-up time was 24.7 months. The scores at the latest exam are following; in MD group, VAS score for neck was 2.32, for arm 1.11; PROLO score was 9.58; in EAD group, VAS score for neck was 2,18 and for arm 0,97; PROLO score was 9,66.Both surgical techniques were success with statically significance(p≤0,05) according to the scores.The techniques were equally effective while postoperative VAS(p>0,412) and PROLO(p>0,980) scores were similar in both groups.Conclusion:Both approaches are effective for selected patients with soft cervical disc herniation in which settled lateral location. Both techniques allow working with two handle, therefore facilitating the gentle manipulation that can obtain for avoiding hazardous effect to spinal cord and nerve root.