首页> 外文期刊>Spine >Osteoconductive bone graft extenders in posterolateral thoracolumbar spinal fusion: A systematic review
【24h】

Osteoconductive bone graft extenders in posterolateral thoracolumbar spinal fusion: A systematic review

机译:后外侧胸腰椎脊柱融合中的骨传导性骨移植扩展剂:系统评价

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

STUDY DESIGN. A systematic review. OBJECTIVE. To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and outcomes of osteoconductive bone graft extenders (BGEs) compared with iliac crest bone graft (ICBG) in posterolateral thoracolumbar spinal fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. ICBG is the current "gold standard" for achieving spinal arthrodesis. However, morbidity associated with its harvesting has led to the increased use of BGEs. METHODS. An electronic literature search was conducted through April 2011 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Cochrane Library. Risk of bias and methodological assessment was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Higgins I test was used to assess for heterogeneity. Pooled weighted relative risk (RR) ratios were calculated to compare fusion and adverse event rates. Weighted standardized mean differences were calculated to compare functional outcome and pain scores. RESULTS. Thirteen studies were included representing a total of 768 patients. Overall study quality was low (mean Cochrane Risk of Bias score, 4.8 out of 12; range, 3-6). Fusion rates were comparable between the BGE and ICBG groups (RR, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-1.03; P = 0.28). Higgins I test (58%) suggested substantial heterogeneity in the pooling of studies. The pooled rate of donor site pain in the ICBG group was 11.2% (95% CI, 7.4%-15.1%). Reported adverse events, excluding donor site pain, were significantly lower in the BGE group (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.28-0.64; P < 0.0001). Functional outcomes were not significantly different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION. Osteoconductive BGEs combined with local spine autograft and/or bone marrow aspirate have comparable fusion rates, similar functional outcomes, lower complication rates, and a lower risk of donor site pain than ICBG. Caution should be taken in interpreting these findings, given the low quality of the studies and the heterogeneity in the results. Randomized controlled studies using blinded assessments are required to help elucidate more conclusive evidence.
机译:学习规划。系统的审查。目的。为了评价与conductive外侧骨移植物(ICBG)相比,在后外侧胸腰椎脊柱融合术中骨传导性骨移植扩展剂(BGE)的疗效,安全性和结果。背景数据摘要。 ICBG是目前实现脊柱关节固定术的“金标准”。然而,与其收获相关的发病率导致BGE的使用增加。方法。通过MEDLINE,EMBASE,CENTRAL和Cochrane图书馆在2011年4月之前进行了电子文献搜索。使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行偏倚风险和方法论评估。 Higgins I测试用于评估异质性。计算合并的加权相对风险(RR)比率,以比较融合和不良事件发生率。计算加权标准化均值差以比较功能结局和疼痛评分。结果。包括十三项研究,代表总共768名患者。总体研究质量较低(平均Cochrane偏倚风险评分,满分12分中的4.8分;范围3-6)。 BGE和ICBG组之间的融合率相当(RR,0.96; 95%置信区间[CI],0.89-1.03; P = 0.28)。希金斯一世(58%)的研究表明,在研究汇总中存在很大的异质性。 ICBG组的供体部位疼痛合并率为11.2%(95%CI,7.4%-15.1%)。 BGE组中报告的不良事件(不包括供体部位疼痛)显着降低(RR,0.42; 95%CI,0.28-0.64; P <0.0001)。两组之间的功能结局无显着差异。结论。与ICBG相比,骨传导性BGE与局部脊柱自体移植和/或骨髓穿刺术相结合的融合率,相似的功能结果,更低的并发症发生率和更低的供体部位疼痛风险。鉴于研究质量低下和结果的异质性,在解释这些发现时应谨慎。需要使用盲法评估的随机对照研究来阐明更多的确凿证据。

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