首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Comparison of Cranial Facet Joint Violation Rate Between Percutaneous and Open Pedicle Screw Placement
【2h】

Comparison of Cranial Facet Joint Violation Rate Between Percutaneous and Open Pedicle Screw Placement

机译:经皮椎弓根螺钉与开放式椎弓根螺钉置入之间的颅小关节损伤率比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Percutaneous and open pedicle screw placements have been widely used in lumbar fusion surgery. However, there are conflicting reports of cranial facet joint violation rate for the 2 techniques.To better determine the rate of cranial facet joint violation, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in the present study.We searched the established electronic literature databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, World of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for trials involving the 2 pedicle screw placement techniques. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.Four comparative trials with a cumulative sample size of 881 patients and 1755 cranial pedicle screws were identified and analyzed. The results showed that cranial facet joint violation rate was 18.18% (154/847) in percutaneous group and 18.72% (170/908) in open group. The pooled data revealed that there was no significant difference in the violation rate (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.24–2.30, P = 0.62). In addition, there was also no significant difference for the rate of severe violation between the 2 techniques (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.55–2.62, P = 0.64, random effect model).Based on the current data, the meta-analysis shows that similar cranial facet joint violation rate occurs during the percutaneous and open pedicle screw placement techniques. In addition, taking the limitations of this study into consideration, it was still not appropriate to draw such a strong conclusion. More well-designed prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to assess violation rate for the 2 techniques in the future.
机译:经皮和开放式椎弓根螺钉置入术已广泛用于腰椎融合手术中。然而,两种技术对颅小关节侵犯率的报道相矛盾。为了更好地确定颅小关节侵犯率,本研究进行了系统的综述和荟萃分析。 MEDLINE,EMBASE,《科学世界》和Cochrane对照试验中央注册数据库,用于涉及2种椎弓根螺钉放置技术的试验。计算比值比(OR)和95%置信区间(CI)。鉴定并分析了四个对比试验,这些试验的累积样本量为881例患者和1755例颅蒂椎弓根螺钉。结果显示,经皮治疗组的颅小关节损伤率为18.18%(154/847),而开放治疗组为18.72%(170/908)。汇总数据显示,违规率没有显着差异(OR 0.75,95%CI 0.24–2.30,P = 0.62)。此外,两种技术之间的严重违规率也没有显着差异(OR 1.20,95%CI 0.55–2.62,P = 0.64,随机效应模型)。根据当前数据,荟萃分析显示在经皮和开放式椎弓根螺钉置入技术中发生相似的颅面小关节侵犯率。此外,考虑到这项研究的局限性,得出这样一个有力的结论仍然不合适。需要更精心设计的前瞻性随机对照试验来评估未来两种技术的违规率。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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