...
首页> 外文期刊>World neurosurgery >Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Versus Posterior Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy for the Treatment of Symptomatic Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis
【24h】

Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Versus Posterior Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy for the Treatment of Symptomatic Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

机译:经皮内窥镜腰椎切除术与后腔垂直腰椎间盘突出术治疗症状性腰椎间盘突出症:全身审查和荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

ObjectiveThe purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical efficacy between percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) versus posterior open lumbar microdiscectomy (OLMD) for the treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation. MethodsWe performed a comprehensive retrieval of related studies in 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library). Randomized or nonrandomized controlled trials reported from January 1990 to December 2017 that compared PELD versus OLMD for the treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation were acquired. The quality of randomized controlled trials was evaluated by the criteria of the Cochrane Back Review Group, and the quality of cohort studies was assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The primary outcome measurements included preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score of sciatica; the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) before and after surgery; the Excellent and Good outcome rate based on Macnab criteria. The secondary outcome measurements included the incidence of complication, residual disk, recurrence, and reoperation; operation time; hospital stay; and time to return to work. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed each study for quality. ResultsNine studies with 1585 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Two were randomized controlled trials and the remaining 7 were retrospective cohort studies. The forest plots showed that no statistically significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of preoperative and postoperative VAS score of sciatica, ODI before and after surgery, the Excellent and Good outcome rate, the complication rate, and the incidence of recurrence and reoperation. However, the PELD group had a higher incidence of residual disk or incomplete decompression than did the OLMD group. In addition, no significant difference was detected in the operation time between the 2 groups, but the PELD group was associated with shorter hospital stay and time of return to work. ConclusionsBased on the present meta-analysis, no significant difference existed in VAS and ODI scores between the 2 surgical procedures, and they were also similar in terms of operation time, complication rate, and incidence of recurrence and reoperation, but PELD showed shorter hospital stay and time of return to work. Thus, under the premise of careful manipulation and complete decompression, we consider that PELD is a relatively more minimally invasive technique, which could be an alternative to OLMD.
机译:本综述和荟萃分析的客观目的是比较经皮内窥镜腰椎切除术(PELD)与后开腰椎切除术(OLMD)之间的临床疗效用于治疗症状腰椎间盘突出。方法网络在4个电子数据库中进行了全面检索相关研究(PubMed,Embase,Science和Cochrane图书馆)。从1990年1月到2017年12月报告的随机或非扫描受控试验,比较了PELD与OLMD用于治疗症状腰椎椎间盘突出症。随机对照试验的质量通过Cochrane返回审查组的标准进行了评估,根据纽卡斯尔 - 渥太华规模评估队列研究质量。主要结果测量包括术前和术后视觉模拟量表(VAS)坐骨神经痛的得分; oswestry残疾指数(ODI)手术前后;基于麦克纳布标准的优秀和良好的结果。次要结果测量包括并发症的发生率,残留磁盘,复发和重新进入;操作时间;住院住宿;和时间重返工作岗位。两位作者独立提取数据并评估每项研究质量。在我们的META分析中包含1585名患者的结果。两项是随机对照试验,其余7个是回顾性队列研究。森林图表明,在术前和术前和手术前后的术前和术后VAS评分,术前和术前,术前和良好的结果,并发症率和复发性和重新进食的发生率方面没有观察到2组之间的统计学显着差异。 。然而,PELD组的残留圆盘的发生率较高,或者不完全减压比OLMD组。此外,在2组之间的操作时间内没有检测到显着差异,但PELD组与较短的住院住宿和回程时间相关联。结论对目前的荟萃分析,在2个外科手术之间的VAS和ODI分数中没有显着差异,它们在操作时间,并发症率和复发性和重新进入的发生率方面也类似,但PELD表明住院时间较短和返回工作的时间。因此,在仔细操纵和完全减压的前提下,我们认为PELD是一种相对更微弱的侵入性技术,这可能是OLMD的替代品。

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