Suppr超能文献

融合与非手术治疗慢性下腰痛:合并症或一般健康因素是否影响疗效?

Fusion versus nonoperative management for chronic low back pain: do comorbid diseases or general health factors affect outcome?

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65212, USA.

出版信息

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Oct 1;36(21 Suppl):S87-95. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822ef89e.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review of literature focused on heterogeneity of treatment effect analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this systematic review were to determine if comorbid disease and general health factors modify the effect of fusion versus nonoperative management in chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients?

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Surgical fusion as a treatment of back pain continues to be controversial due to inconsistent responses to treatment. The reasons for this are multifactorial but may include heterogeneity in the patient population and in surgeon's attitudes and approaches to this complex problem. There is a relative paucity of high quality publications from which to draw conclusions. We were interested in investigating the possibility of detecting treatment response differences comparing fusion to conservative management for CLBP among subpopulations with different disease specific and general health risk factors.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library for literature published from 1990 through December 2010. To evaluate whether the effects of CLBP treatment varied by disease or general health subgroups, we sought randomized controlled trials or nonrandomized observational studies with concurrent controls evaluating surgical fusion versus nonoperative management for CLBP. Of the original 127 citations identified, only 5 reported treatment effects (fusion vs. conservative management) separately by disease and general health subgroups of interest. Of those, only two focused on patients who had primarily back pain without spinal stenosis or spondylolisthesis.

RESULTS

Few studies comparing fusion to nonoperative management reported differences in outcome by specific disease or general health subpopulations. Among those that did, we observed the effect of fusion compared to nonoperative management was slightly more favorable in patients with no additional comorbidities compared with those with additional comorbidities and more marked in nonsmokers compared with smokers.

CONCLUSION

It is unclear from the literature which patients are the best candidates for fusion versus conservative management when experiencing CLBP without significant neurological impairment. Nonsmokers may be more likely to have a favorable surgical fusion outcome in CLBP patients. Comorbid disease presence has not been shown to definitively modify the effect of fusion. Further prospective studies that are designed to evaluate these and other subgroup effects are encouraged to confirm these findings.

CLINICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

We recommend optimizing the management of medical co-morbidities and smoking cessation before considering surgical fusion in CLBP patients. Strength of recommendation: Weak.

摘要

研究设计

系统文献回顾,重点关注治疗效果分析的异质性。

目的

本系统综述的目的是确定合并症和一般健康因素是否会改变慢性下腰痛(CLBP)患者融合与非手术治疗的效果?

背景资料概要

由于治疗反应不一致,手术融合作为腰痛的治疗方法仍然存在争议。造成这种情况的原因有很多,但可能包括患者人群的异质性以及外科医生对这一复杂问题的态度和方法的异质性。我们感兴趣的是,在不同疾病特异性和一般健康危险因素的亚人群中,比较融合与保守治疗 CLBP 时,是否存在检测治疗反应差异的可能性。

方法

在 MEDLINE 和 Cochrane 协作图书馆中进行了系统搜索,以查找 1990 年至 2010 年 12 月期间发表的文献。为了评估 CLBP 治疗效果是否因疾病或一般健康亚组而异,我们寻找了评估手术融合与非手术治疗 CLBP 的随机对照试验或非随机观察性研究,并与同期对照进行比较。在最初确定的 127 条引文,只有 5 条报告了治疗效果(融合与保守治疗),分别按疾病和一般健康亚组进行分析。其中只有两项研究关注的是主要为腰痛而无椎管狭窄或脊椎滑脱的患者。

结果

比较融合与非手术治疗的少数研究报告了特定疾病或一般健康亚人群的结果差异。在那些有报告的研究中,我们观察到与非手术治疗相比,融合治疗在没有其他合并症的患者中效果略好,而在有其他合并症的患者中效果更显著,在不吸烟者中效果比吸烟者更显著。

结论

从文献中尚不清楚在没有明显神经功能障碍的情况下,哪些患者是融合与保守治疗的最佳选择。在 CLBP 患者中,不吸烟者的手术融合效果可能更理想。合并症的存在并未明确改变融合的效果。鼓励进一步开展旨在评估这些和其他亚组效果的前瞻性研究,以证实这些发现。

临床建议

我们建议在考虑对 CLBP 患者进行手术融合之前,优化对合并症的管理和戒烟。推荐强度:弱。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验