Suppr超能文献

我们目前对胸段脊髓损伤的恢复和结果了解多少?一项系统评价。

What do we currently know about thoracic spinal cord injury recovery and outcomes? A systematic review.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington 98104, USA.

出版信息

J Neurosurg Spine. 2012 Sep;17(1 Suppl):52-64. doi: 10.3171/2012.6.AOSPINE1287.

Abstract

OBJECT

The purpose of this paper was to systematically review and critically appraise the evidence for whether there are differences in outcomes or recovery after thoracic spinal cord injuries (SCIs) based on the spinal level, the timing of intervention, or cause of SCI.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE through January 5, 2012. From 486 articles identified, 10 included data on the population of interest. Included studies were assigned a level of evidence (LOE) rating based on study quality, and an overall strength of evidence was assessed. To estimate the effect of injury level on patient outcomes, the relative risk and risk difference were calculated when data were available.

RESULTS

From 486 citations identified, 3 registry studies and 7 retrospective cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. All were rated as being of poor quality (LOE III). Limited literature exists on the epidemiology of traumatic and nontraumatic SCI. Few studies evaluated outcomes based on SCI level within the thoracic spine. Pulmonary complications and thromboembolic events were less common in persons with lower thoracic SCI (T7-12) than in those with higher thoracic SCI (T1-6) in 2 large studies, but no differences were found in functional outcomes in 4 smaller studies. Patients undergoing earlier surgery (< 72 hours) may have fewer ventilator, ICU, and hospital days than those undergoing later surgery. One small study of SCI during repair of aortic aneurysm compared with traumatic SCI reported similar outcomes for both groups. There are substantial deficiencies in the scientific literature on thoracic SCI in regard to assessment, outcomes ratings, and effectiveness of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall strength of evidence for all outcomes reported is low. Definitive conclusions should not be drawn regarding the prognosis for outcome and recovery after thoracic SCI. From a physiological standpoint, additional methodologically rigorous studies that take into consideration various levels of injury in more anatomically and physiologically relevant form are needed. Use of validated, comprehensive outcomes tools are important to improve our understanding of the impact of thoracic SCI and aid in examining factors in recovery from thoracic SCI.

摘要

目的

本文旨在系统回顾和批判性评价有关胸段脊髓损伤(SCI)后结局或康复是否因脊髓损伤水平、干预时机或病因不同而存在差异的证据。

方法

通过 2012 年 1 月 5 日之前的 PubMed/MEDLINE 进行系统检索。从 486 篇文章中,有 10 篇文章包含了目标人群的数据。根据研究质量对纳入研究进行了证据水平(LOE)评级,并对整体证据强度进行了评估。为了估计损伤水平对患者结局的影响,当有数据时,计算了相对风险和风险差。

结果

从 486 条引文中共纳入 3 项注册研究和 7 项回顾性队列研究。所有研究均被评为质量较差(LOE III)。创伤性和非创伤性 SCI 的流行病学相关文献有限。很少有研究根据胸段 SCI 水平评估结局。2 项大型研究显示,较低胸段 SCI(T7-12)患者的肺部并发症和血栓栓塞事件发生率低于较高胸段 SCI(T1-6)患者,但在 4 项较小的研究中未发现功能结局存在差异。与接受晚期手术(<72 小时)的患者相比,早期手术(<72 小时)的患者可能需要更少的呼吸机、重症监护病房和住院天数。一项关于胸主动脉瘤修复期间 SCI 与创伤性 SCI 比较的小型研究报告称,两组患者的结局相似。关于胸段 SCI,在评估、结局评定和治疗效果方面,该领域的科学文献存在较大缺陷。

结论

所有报告结局的总体证据强度均较低。对于胸段 SCI 后结局和康复的预后,不应得出明确结论。从生理学角度来看,需要更多方法严谨的研究,考虑到更具解剖学和生理学相关性的不同损伤水平。使用经过验证的全面结局工具对于提高我们对胸段 SCI 影响的认识以及帮助检查胸段 SCI 康复的相关因素非常重要。

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