首页> 外文期刊>World neurosurgery >Decompression Alone Versus Decompression and Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Meta-Analysis
【24h】

Decompression Alone Versus Decompression and Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Meta-Analysis

机译:单独减压与减压和腰椎退化性脊椎细胞的融合和融合:荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness and safety of decompression alone (D group) with decompression and fusion (DF group) for patients who were diagnosed with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS). MethodsElectronic databases were searched for relevant studies that compared decompression alone with decompression and fusion for LDS. Then, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted, and the extracted data were analyzed by using RevMan 5.3. We used the random effects model for studies that had heterogeneity between them, and for those without heterogeneity, the fixed model was used. ResultsFour randomized controlled trials and 14 nonrandomized controlled studies involving 77,994 patients were included for this meta-analysis. Although the DF group was associated with a higher postoperative change score on a visual analog scale compared with the D group in terms of back (P?= 0.02) and leg (P?= 0.04), they failed to reach the minimum clinically important difference. Moreover, no significant differences were found in Oswestry Disability Index, European Quality of Life–5 Dimensions, Short-Form 36 physical and mental component summaries score, and patients' satisfaction (P> 0.05) between treatment groups. Complication rate and reoperation rate (P> 0.05) were similar in both groups. Data analysis also showed that the DF group was associated with longer operation time (P< 0.00001), more intraoperative blood?loss?(P< 0.00001), and longer length of hospital stay (P< 0.00001). ConclusionsAmong patients with LDS, decompression and fusion surgery did not yield better clinical outcomes than decompression alone surgery. Also, the complication rate and reoperation rate were comparable between treatment groups. However, patients who had undergone decompression alone had shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter hospital stay.
机译:ObjectiveTo对被诊断患者诊断患者的减压和融合(DF组)的减压(D组)的有效性和安全性对比被诊断患有腰椎退行性脊椎细胞(LDS)的患者。搜索了方法中的数据库以获得与LDS的减压和融合相比,将减压和LDS的融合进行比较。然后,进行数据提取和质量评估,并使用Revman 5.3分析提取的数据。我们使用了在它们之间具有异质性的研究的随机效果模型,并且对于没有异质性的研究,使用固定模型。结果福随机对照试验和14项涉及77,994名患者的非andomized对照研究,用于该荟萃分析。尽管DF组与在后面的D组(P?= 0.02)和腿部(P?= 0.04)中与D组相比,DF组与视觉模拟规模的更高术后变化得分相关联(P?= 0.04),但他们未能达到最低临床重要差异。此外,在Oswestry残疾指数中没有发现显着差异,欧洲生命级别 - 5维度,短型36个身体和精神成分摘要评分,以及治疗组之间的患者满意度(P> 0.05)。两组相似,并发症率和再捕获速率(P> 0.05)。数据分析还表明,DF组与较长的操作时间相关(P <0.00001),更多的术中血液?损失?(P <0.00001),以及较长的医院住宿时间(P <0.00001)。结论Amononsamong患者LD,减压和融合手术的患者没有比减压单独手术产生更好的临床结果。此外,并发症率和再置移率在治疗组之间是可比的。然而,单独进行减压的患者具有较短的操作时间,术中血液损失较小,以及较短的住院入住。

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