首页> 外文期刊>Cureus. >Comparison of Decompression Alone Versus Decompression with Fusion for Stenotic Lumbar Spine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
【24h】

Comparison of Decompression Alone Versus Decompression with Fusion for Stenotic Lumbar Spine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

机译:减压与减压减压融合术治疗狭窄性腰椎的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

The?first line of treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis (with or without?lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis) involves conservative options such as anti-inflammatory drugs and analgesics. Approximately, 10%-15%?of patients require surgery. Surgical treatment aims to decompress the spinal canal and dural sac from degenerative bony and ligamentous overgrowth. Different studies have given conflicting results. The?aim of our study is to clear the confusion by comparing two surgical techniques. This?meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the?preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A literature search was conducted of the Ovid Embase, Scopus, Pubmed, Ovid Medline, Google Scholar, and Cochrane library databases. A quality and risk of bias assessment was also done. The?analysis was done using Revman software (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014,?Copenhagen, Denmark). A total of 76 studies were extracted from the literature search and 29 studies with relevant information were shortlisted. Nine studies were included in the meta-analysis after a quality assessment and eligibility. Fusion with decompression surgery was found to be a better technique when compared to decompression alone for spinal stenosis in terms of the Oswestry Disability index and the visual analog pain scale for back and leg pain. On the basis of the?meta-analysis of the?recent medical literature, the authors concluded that decompression with fusion is a 3.5-times better surgical technique than decompression alone for spinal stenosis.
机译:腰椎管狭窄症(有或没有腰椎退行性腰椎滑脱症)的第一线治疗包括保守的选择,例如消炎药和镇痛药。大约有10%-15%?的患者需要手术。外科治疗的目的是使脊柱和硬膜囊从退化的骨和韧带过度生长中解脱出来。不同的研究得出了相互矛盾的结果。我们研究的目的是通过比较两种手术技术来消除混淆。根据系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目进行了这种元分析。对Ovid Embase,Scopus,Pubmed,Ovid Medline,Google Scholar和Cochrane图书馆数据库进行了文献检索。还进行了偏倚评估的质量和风险。使用Revman软件进行分析(北欧Cochrane中心,The Cochrane Collaboration,2014年,丹麦哥本哈根)。从文献检索中总共提取了76项研究,并筛选了29项具有相关信息的研究。经过质量评估和资格评定后,荟萃分析包括九项研究。就Oswestry残疾指数和背部和腿部疼痛的视觉模拟疼痛量表而言,与仅进行减压治疗的椎管狭窄相比,与减压手术融合是一种更好的技术。根据对最新医学文献的荟萃分析,作者得出结论,对于椎管狭窄,融合减压术比单纯减压术的手术技术高出3.5倍。

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