...
首页> 外文期刊>Medicine. >Anterior decompression and fusion versus laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy due to ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament: A meta-analysis
【24h】

Anterior decompression and fusion versus laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy due to ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament: A meta-analysis

机译:宫颈肌钙病前的前解压缩与椎间膜成形术因后纵向韧带的骨化:META分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: Both anterior decompression and fusion (ADF) and laminoplasty (LAMP) are frequently used for the treatment of cervical myelopathy due to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). However, some controversies still remained in surgical options. We investigated whether ADF had better neurological outcome than LAMP in the treatment of cervical myelopathy due to OPLL. Secondary outcomes included operation time, blood loss, rate of complication and reoperation. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials database were searched to identify potential clinical studies compared ADF with LAMP for treatment of cervical myelopathy owing to OPLL. We also manually searched the reference lists of articles and reviews for possible relevant studies. Quality assessment was performed according to Cochrane Handbook and meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 12.0 software. Results: Nine studies involving 712 patients were finally included in this analysis. Compared with LAMP, ADF was associated with an increase of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score (WMD = 1.86, 95% CI 0.43 to 3.29, P = .011) and recovery JOA score at final follow-up (WMD = 30.94, 95% CI 20.56 to 41.33, P = .000). And, ADF was associated with a decrease of the late neurologic deterioration than LAMP group (RR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.92, P = .003). However, ADF was associated with an increase of the postoperative cervical lordosis (WMD = 4.47, 95% CI 1.58 to 7.36, P = .002) than LAMP. There was no significant difference between the complication, reoperation rate ( P .05). What's more, ADF was associated with an increase of the operation time than LAMP ( P .05). Conclusions: ADF yields better neurological improvement, but higher cervical lordosis and longer operation time compared with LAMP for cervical myelopathy caused by OPLL. No significant difference was found in the complication and re-operation rate.
机译:背景:前减压和融合(ADF)和层压术(灯)通常用于治疗宫颈肌钙病,因后纵韧带(OPLL)的骨化。但是,一些争议仍然是手术选择。我们调查了ADF是否由于OPLL治疗宫颈肌钙病的灯具具有更好的神经系统结果。二次结果包括手术时间,失血,并发症率和再运产。方法:对受控试验数据库的PubMed,Embase和Cochrane登记册进行了搜索,识别潜在的临床研究,与OPLL以灯泡治疗宫颈肌钙病。我们还手动搜索了文章的参考列表,并对可能的相关研究进行了评论。根据Cochrane手册进行质量评估,使用STATA 12.0软件进行META分析。结果:涉及712名患者的九项研究最终包括在该分析中。与灯相比,ADF与日本矫形协会(JOA)得分的增加有关(WMD = 1.86,95%CI 0.43至3.29,P = .011),并在最终随访时恢复JOA评分(WMD = 30.94, 95%CI 20.56至41.33,p = .000)。并且,ADF与晚期神经系统劣化的降低相关,而不是灯组(RR = 0.34,95%CI 0.12至0.92,P = .003)。然而,ADF与术后宫颈脊柱源性的增加有关(WMD = 4.47,95%CI 1.58至7.36,P = .002)。并发症之间没有显着差异,重新进入率(P> .05)。更重要的是,ADF与灯的操作时间的增加有关(P <.05)。结论:ADF产生更好的神经系统改善,但与OPLL引起的宫颈肌钙病的灯相比,颈椎病患和较长的操作时间。在并发症和重新运营率中没有发现显着差异。

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