How Safe Is Unilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation in Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Management of 2-Level Lumbar Degenerative Disorders Compared with Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation? Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Questo rapporto è stato verificato
da uno o più autori della
pubblicazione originale.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2020;8(20):25 World Neurosurg. 2020 Aug 1(Volume 140): 357-368Riassunto dello studio
A total of 5 randomized controlled trials containing 215 patients with multilevel degenerative lumbar spine disorders were included in this meta-analysis comparing unilateral pedicle screw fixation to bilateral pedicle screw fixation following spinal fusion. The primary outcomes of interest included the incidence of successful fusion, overall complications, dual tear, superficial wound complications, and screw-related complications. The secondary outcomes of interest included back and leg pain on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the Short-Form 36 health survey (SF-36) for physical function, general health, and mental health. Other outcomes included total blood loss, length of hospital stay, and operative time. All pooled primary and secondary outcomes were not statistically significantly different between the unilateral or bilateral pedicle screw fixation groups. However, pooled results demonstrated that operative time was significantly shorter in the unilateral pedicle screw fixation vs the bilateral group, whilst pooled total blood loss and length of hospital stay were not statistically significantly different between the two treatment arms. Finally, in a subgroup analysis of the unilateral pedicle screw fixation group comparing minimally invasive and open approaches, the pooled incidence of complications was not statistically significantly different between the minimally invasive and open approaches. However, a pooled composite outcome of operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, VAS, and ODI scores was statistically significantly different in favour of the minimally invasive approach (p=0.0004), but the heterogeneity was high (I^2=95.9%).
Sblocca il Rapporto ACE completo
Ha accesso a 4 altri articoli GRATUITI questo mese.
Clicchi qui sotto per sbloccare e visualizzare questo ACE Reports
Sblocca ora
Valutazioni critiche dei più recenti studi randomizzati controllati ad alto impatto e revisioni sistematiche in ortopedia.
Accesso ai contenuti del podcast OrthoEvidence, comprese le collaborazioni con il Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, le interviste con chirurghi di fama internazionale e le tavole rotonde sulle novità e gli argomenti ortopedici
Abbonamento a The Pulse, una newsletter bisettimanale basata sulle evidenze scientifiche, progettata per aiutarla a prendere decisioni cliniche migliori.
Accesso esclusivo ad articoli di contenuto originale, tra cui revisioni sistematiche interne, e articoli sui metodi di ricerca sanitaria e su argomenti ortopedici scottanti.
Oppure faccia l'upgrade oggi stesso e acceda a tutti i contenuti di OrthoEvidence a soli 1,99$ a settimana.
Ha già un account? Effettui il login
È affiliato ad una delle nostre associazioni partner?
Clicchi qui per ottenere l'accesso gratuito tra i vantaggi dei membri della sua associazione!
Si abboni a "L'Impulso"
Ortopedia basata sull'evidenza direttamente nella sua casella di posta elettronica. ABBONARSI
