Suppr超能文献

单侧椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折与双侧椎体后凸成形术相比,在有效性和安全性上是否相当?一项荟萃分析。

Is unilateral kyphoplasty as effective and safe as bilateral kyphoplasties for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures? A meta-analysis.

作者信息

Huang Zhaobo, Wan Shuanglin, Ning Lei, Han Shiliang

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 3 East Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310016, Zhejiang, China.

出版信息

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014 Sep;472(9):2833-42. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3745-0. Epub 2014 Jun 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

An osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture is a common condition in elderly people, especially women. The percutaneous kyphoplasty is an effective treatment for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Controversy remains regarding whether a unilateral or a bilateral approach is superior, and to our knowledge, there have been no large studies comparing these two approaches, therefore a meta-analysis synthesizing the data on this question is warranted.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked the following questions: (1) Is there evidence to suggest a benefit in clinical outcome as assessed by the VAS and Oswestry Disability Index of a unilateral kyphoplasty or bilateral kyphoplasties? (2) Are the complications associated with the two approaches different? (3) Do the procedures result in different kyphosis angle reduction or anterior vertebral height restoration? (4) Is the surgical time for the procedures different?

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Knowledge MEDLINE (January 1980 to June 2013), and reference lists of eligible prospective studies. The levels of the evidence and recommendations were assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system. Five studies encompassing 253 patients met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

The short- and long-term clinical outcomes as assessed by the VAS and Oswestry Disability Index showed no differences between unilateral and bilateral kyphoplasties (p = 0.41, p = 0.60 for VAS; p = 0.10, p = 0.36 for Oswestry Disability Index). There were no differences in complications such as cement leakage and adjacent vertebral fractures associated with the two approaches (p = 0.43 and p = 0.95). The kyphosis angle reduction and anterior vertebral height restoration showed no difference between the two approaches (p = 0.34 and p = 0.46). The unilateral approach was shorter in terms of surgical time (mean difference, -24.98; p < 0.0001). The overall GRADE system evidence quality was very low, with only high evidence for operation time, which lessens our confidence in recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Unilateral and bilateral percutaneous kyphoplasties appear to be safe and effective for treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. No clinically important differences were found between them. Considering less operation time and less cost, we suggest that a unilateral percutaneous kyphoplasty is advantageous, but because of the poor quality of the evidence, high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to resolve this issue.

摘要

背景

骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折在老年人中较为常见,尤其是女性。经皮椎体后凸成形术是治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的有效方法。关于单侧或双侧入路哪种更具优势仍存在争议,据我们所知,尚无大型研究比较这两种入路,因此有必要进行一项荟萃分析来综合这一问题的数据。

问题/目的:我们提出以下问题:(1)是否有证据表明,经单侧椎体后凸成形术或双侧椎体后凸成形术治疗后,在视觉模拟评分(VAS)和奥斯威斯功能障碍指数评估的临床结果方面存在益处?(2)与这两种入路相关的并发症是否不同?(3)这两种手术在纠正后凸畸形角度或恢复椎体前缘高度方面是否产生不同效果?(4)这两种手术的手术时间是否不同?

方法

我们检索了考克兰图书馆、PubMed MEDLINE、EMBASE、科睿唯安Web of Knowledge MEDLINE(1980年1月至2013年6月)以及符合条件的前瞻性研究的参考文献列表。使用GRADE(推荐分级、评估、制定与评价)系统评估证据水平和推荐等级。五项涵盖253例患者的研究符合纳入标准。

结果

VAS和奥斯威斯功能障碍指数评估的短期和长期临床结果显示,单侧和双侧椎体后凸成形术之间无差异(VAS:p = 0.41,p = 0.60;奥斯威斯功能障碍指数:p = 0.10,p = 0.36)。与这两种入路相关的并发症,如骨水泥渗漏和相邻椎体骨折,无差异(p = 0.43和p = 0.95)。两种入路在纠正后凸畸形角度和恢复椎体前缘高度方面无差异(p = 0.34和p = 0.46)。单侧入路的手术时间更短(平均差值,-24.98;p < 0.0001)。总体GRADE系统证据质量非常低,仅手术时间有高等级证据,这降低了我们对推荐的信心。

结论

单侧和双侧经皮椎体后凸成形术在治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折方面似乎都是安全有效的。两者之间未发现临床上的重要差异。考虑到手术时间更短且成本更低,我们建议单侧经皮椎体后凸成形术具有优势,但由于证据质量较差,需要高质量的随机对照试验来解决这一问题。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验