...
首页> 外文期刊>Pain Physician >Comparison of 7 Surgical Interventions for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Network Meta-analysis
【24h】

Comparison of 7 Surgical Interventions for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Network Meta-analysis

机译:腰椎间盘突出术治疗腰椎间盘突出的比较:网络荟萃分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND: The number of interventions on intervertebral discs rapidly increased and the treatment options for lumbar disc surgery quickly evolved. It is important that the safety and efficacy of all new innovative procedures be compared with currently accepted forms of treatment; however, the previous pairwise meta-analyses could not develop the hierarchy of these treatments. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study is to perform a network meta-analysis to evaluate the clinical results of 7 surgical interventions for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation.STUDY DESIGN: Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for multiple treatment comparisons of lumbar disc herniation. METHODS: We performed a Bayesian-framework network meta-analysis of RCTs to compare 7 surgical interventions for people with lumbar disc herniation. The eligible RCTs were identified by searching Embase, Pubmed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google scholar. Data from 3 outcomes (success, complications, and reoperation rate) were independently extracted by 2 authors.RESULTS: A total of 29 RCTs including 3,146 participants were finally included into this article. Our meta-analysis provides hierarchies of these 7 interventions. For the success rate the rank probability (from best to worst): percutaneous endoscopic lumber discectomy (PELD) > standard open discectomy (SOD) > standard open microsurgical discectomy (SOMD) > chemonucleolysis (CN) > microendoscopic discectomy (MED) > percutaneous laser disc decompression (PLDD) > automated percutaneous lumber discectomy (APLD). For the complication rate the rank probability (from best to worst): PELD > SOMD > SOD > MED > PLDD > CN > APLD. For the reoperation rate the rank probability (from best to worst): SOMD > SOD > MED > PLDD > PELD > CN > APLD.LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this network meta-analysis include the range of study populations and inconformity of the follow-up times and outcome measurements.CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides evidence that PELD might be the best choice to increase the success rate and decrease the complication rate, moreover SOMD might be the best option to drop the reoperation rate. APLD might lead to the lowest success rate and the highest complication and reoperation rate. Higher quality RCTs and direct head to head trials are needed to confirm these results.Key words: Lumbar disc herniation, discectomy, minimally invasive surgery, network meta-analysis
机译:背景:椎间盘的干预次数迅速增加,腰椎椎间盘突出的治疗方案迅速发展。重要的是,所有新的创新程序的安全性和有效性都与目前接受的治疗形式进行比较;然而,先前的成对元分析无法制定这些治疗的层次。目的:该研究的目的是进行网络元分析,以评估腰椎间盘突出治疗的7个外科手术干预的临床结果。研究:用于多种治疗比较的随机对照试验(RCT)的网络荟萃分析腰椎间盘突出。方法:我们对RCT进行了贝叶斯框架网络Meta分析,以比较腰椎间盘突出症的7人手术干预措施。通过搜索embase,Pubmed,Cochrane中央登记册(中央)和谷歌学者来确定符合条件的RCT。来自3个结果的数据(成功,并发症和重组率)由2名作者独立提取。结果:总共29个RCT,包括3,146名参与者,最终包含在本条中。我们的META分析提供了这7个干预措施的层次结构。为了成功率达到秩概率(从最佳最差):经皮内窥镜木材椎间盘切除术(PELD)>标准开放点切除术(SOD)>标准开放显微外科椎间盘切除术(SOMD)>化学核酸(CN)>微观透明度(MED)>经皮激光盘减压(PLDD)>自动经皮木材切除术(APLD)。对于并发症率达到秩概率(从最佳最差):PELD> SOMD> SOD> MED> PLDD> CN> APLD。为了重新进入率,秩概率(从最佳到最差):SOMD> SOD> MED> PLDD> PELD> CN> APLD.LIMITATIONS:该网络元分析的局限包括研究人群的范围和以下的不合格 - 凌晨和结果测量。结论:这个元分析提供了证据,即PELD可能是增加成功率并降低并发症率的最佳选择,而且SOMD可能是降低再次运输率的最佳选择。 APLD可能导致成功率最低和复杂性最高,​​重新组合率。需要更高质量的RCT和直接前往头部试验来确认这些结果.Key字:腰椎间盘突出,椎间盘突出术,微创手术,网络Meta分析

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号