Liu Zheng, Fei Qi, Wang Bingqiang, Lv Pengfei, Chi Cheng, Yang Yong, Zhao Fan, Lin Jisheng, Ma Zhao
Department of Orthopaedics, Peking University Shougang Hospital, Beijing, China.
Department of Orthopaedics, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
PLoS One. 2014 Nov 6;9(11):e111979. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111979. eCollection 2014.
Meta-analysis.
Bilateral pedicle screw fixation (PS) after lumbar interbody fusion is a widely accepted method of managing various spinal diseases. Recently, unilateral PS fixation has been reported as effective as bilateral PS fixation. This meta-analysis aimed to comparatively assess the efficacy and safety of unilateral PS fixation and bilateral PS fixation in the minimally invasive (MIS) lumbar interbody fusion for one-level degenerative lumbar spine disease.
MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, BIOSIS Previews, and Cochrane Library were searched through March 30, 2014. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) on unilateral versus bilateral PS fixation in MIS lumbar interbody fusion that met the inclusion criteria and the methodological quality standard were retrieved and reviewed. Data on participant characteristics, interventions, follow-up period, and outcomes were extracted from the included studies and analyzed by Review Manager 5.2.
Six studies (5 RCTs and 1 CCT) involving 298 patients were selected. There were no significant differences between unilateral and bilateral PS fixation procedures in fusion rate, complications, visual analogue score (VAS) for leg pain, VAS for back pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI). Both fixation procedures had similar length of hospital stay (MD = 0.38, 95% CI = -0.83 to 1.58; P = 0.54). In contrast, bilateral PS fixation was associated with significantly more intra-operative blood loss (P = 0.002) and significantly longer operation time (P = 0.02) as compared with unilateral PS fixation.
Unilateral PS fixation appears as effective and safe as bilateral PS fixation in MIS lumbar interbody fusion but requires less operative time and causes less blood loss, thus offering a simple alternative approach for one-level lumbar degenerative disease.
荟萃分析。
腰椎椎间融合术后双侧椎弓根螺钉固定(PS)是治疗各种脊柱疾病广泛接受的方法。最近,有报道称单侧PS固定与双侧PS固定效果相同。本荟萃分析旨在比较评估单侧PS固定和双侧PS固定在微创(MIS)腰椎椎间融合治疗单节段退变性腰椎疾病中的疗效和安全性。
检索截至2014年3月30日的MEDLINE/PubMed、EMBASE、BIOSIS Previews和Cochrane图书馆。检索并回顾了符合纳入标准和方法学质量标准的关于MIS腰椎椎间融合术中单侧与双侧PS固定的随机对照试验(RCT)和对照临床试验(CCT)。从纳入研究中提取有关参与者特征、干预措施、随访期和结果的数据,并使用Review Manager 5.2进行分析。
选择了6项研究(5项RCT和1项CCT),涉及298例患者。单侧和双侧PS固定手术在融合率、并发症、腿痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、背痛VAS、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)方面无显著差异。两种固定手术的住院时间相似(MD = 0.38,95%CI = -0.83至1.58;P = 0.54)。相比之下,与单侧PS固定相比,双侧PS固定术中失血量明显更多(P = 0.002),手术时间明显更长(P = 0.02)。
在MIS腰椎椎间融合术中,单侧PS固定似乎与双侧PS固定一样有效和安全,但手术时间更短,失血量更少,因此为单节段腰椎退行性疾病提供了一种简单的替代方法。