首页> 外文期刊>European spine journal >Comparative clinical efficacy and safety of cortical bone trajectory screw fixation and traditional pedicle screw fixation in posterior lumbar fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Comparative clinical efficacy and safety of cortical bone trajectory screw fixation and traditional pedicle screw fixation in posterior lumbar fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:皮质骨轨迹螺钉固定的比较临床疗效和安全性,后腰椎融合中的传统椎弓根螺钉固定:系统评价与荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

To compare the clinical efficacy and safety between cortical bone trajectory (CBT) and pedicle screw (PS) in posterior lumbar fusion surgery. Five electronic databases were used to identify relevant studies comparing the clinical efficacy and safety between CBT and PS. The main outcomes were postoperative fusion rates and complication (especially in superior facet joint violations, symptomatic ASD, wound infection, dural tear, screw malposition and hematoma). The secondary results included operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, incision length, ODI, VAS, JOA score, JOA recovery rate, patients satisfaction and health-related quality of life. The outcomes showed that there was no significant difference in terms of fusion rate (p = 0.55), back and leg VAS score (p 0.05), JOA score (p = 0.08) and incidence of reoperation (p = 0.07). However, CBT was superior to PS with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (p = 0.02), JOA recovery rate (p 0.00001) and patients satisfaction (p = 0.001). In addition, CBT was superior to PS with significantly lower incidence of superior facet joint violation and symptomatic ASD. However, there was no significant difference regarding wound infection (p 0.05) and screw malposition (p 0.05). CBT group required significant shorter operation time, less blood loss, shorter incision length and shorter length of hospital stay in comparison with PS group (p 0.05). Both CBT and PS achieve similar, fusion rate and revision surgery rate. Furthermore, CBT is superior to PS with lower incidence of complications, shorter operation time, less blood loss, shorter incision length and shorter length of hospital stay. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
机译:比较后腰椎融合手术中皮质骨轨迹(CBT)和椎弓根螺钉(PS)之间的临床疗效和安全性。使用五个电子数据库来识别相关研究,比较CBT和PS之间的临床疗效和安全性。主要结果是术后融合率和并发症(特别是在优质方面关节侵犯,症状ASD,伤口感染,多云撕裂,螺杆口头和血肿)。二次结果包括操作时间,术中失血,住院时间长度,切口长度,odi,VAS,JOA得分,JOA回收率,患者满意度和与健康有关的生活质量。结果表明,融合率方面没有显着差异(p = 0.55),背部和腿部VAS评分(P> 0.05),JOA得分(P = 0.08)和再生的发生率(P = 0.07)。然而,CBT与Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)(P = 0.02),JOA回收率(P <0.00001)和患者满意度优于PS(P = 0.001)。此外,CBT优于PS,具有显着较低的突起侵犯和症状ASD的发病率。然而,关于伤口感染没有显着差异(p> 0.05)和螺杆选址(P> 0.05)。与PS组相比,CBT集团需要显着较短的操作时间,较少的血液损失,较短的切口长度和较短的住院时间(P <0.05)。 CBT和PS都达到了类似,融合率和修订手术率。此外,CBT优于PS,并发症发生率较低,操作时间较短,血液损失较少,切口较短,住院时间较短。这些幻灯片可以在电子补充材料下检索。

著录项

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