Suppr超能文献

多节段颈椎脊髓病行椎板切除术和融合术与椎板成形术的比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析

Laminectomy and fusion vs laminoplasty for multi-level cervical myelopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Phan Kevin, Scherman Daniel B, Xu Joshua, Leung Vannessa, Virk Sohaib, Mobbs Ralph J

机构信息

NeuroSpine Surgery Research Group (NSURG), Sydney, Australia.

NeuroSpine Clinic, Prince of Wales Private Hospital, Suite 7, Level 7, Randwick, Sydney, NSW, 2031, Australia.

出版信息

Eur Spine J. 2017 Jan;26(1):94-103. doi: 10.1007/s00586-016-4671-5. Epub 2016 Jun 24.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Surgical approaches for multi-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) include posterior cervical surgery via laminectomy and fusion (LF) or expansive laminoplasty (EL). The relative benefits and risks of either approach in terms of clinical outcomes and complications are not well established. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to address this topic.

METHODS

Electronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to January 2016, identifying all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs comparing LF vs EL for multi-level cervical myelopathy. Data was extracted and analyzed according to predefined endpoints.

RESULTS

From 10 included studies, there were 335 patients who underwent LF compared to 320 patients who underwent EL. There was no significant difference found postoperatively between LF and EL groups in terms of postoperative JOA (P = 0.39), VAS neck pain (P = 0.93), postoperative CCI (P = 0.32) and Nurich grade (P = 0.42). The total complication rate was higher for LF compared to EL (26.4 vs 15.4 %, RR 1.77, 95 % CI 1.10, 2.85, I  = 34 %, P = 0.02). Reoperation rate was found to be similar between LF and EL groups (P = 0.52). A significantly higher pooled rate of nerve palsies was found in the LF group compared to EL (9.9 vs 3.7 %, RR 2.76, P = 0.03). No significant difference was found in terms of operative time and intraoperative blood loss.

CONCLUSIONS

From the available low-quality evidence, LF and EL approaches for CSM demonstrates similar clinical improvement and loss of lordosis. However, a higher complication rate was found in LF group, including significantly higher nerve palsy complications. This requires further validation and investigation in larger sample-size prospective and randomized studies.

摘要

背景

多节段脊髓型颈椎病(CSM)的手术方法包括后路颈椎椎板切除融合术(LF)或扩大椎板成形术(EL)。两种方法在临床疗效和并发症方面的相对益处和风险尚未明确。为此进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

方法

使用六个数据库进行电子检索,检索时间从建库至2016年1月,以识别所有比较LF与EL治疗多节段颈椎病的相关随机对照试验(RCT)和非RCT。根据预先设定的终点提取并分析数据。

结果

纳入的10项研究中,335例患者接受了LF,320例患者接受了EL。LF组和EL组术后的日本骨科协会(JOA)评分(P = 0.39)、颈部疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)(P = 0.93)、术后颈椎脊髓病指数(CCI)(P = 0.32)和Nurich分级(P = 0.42)均无显著差异。LF组的总并发症发生率高于EL组(26.4%对15.4%,RR 1.77,95%CI 1.10,2.85,I² = 34%,P = 0.02)。LF组和EL组的再次手术率相似(P = 0.52)。与EL组相比,LF组的神经麻痹合并率显著更高(9.9%对3.7%,RR 2.76,P = 0.03)。手术时间和术中失血量方面无显著差异。

结论

根据现有低质量证据,CSM的LF和EL手术方法在临床改善和颈椎生理前凸丢失方面表现相似。然而,LF组的并发症发生率更高,包括显著更高的神经麻痹并发症。这需要在更大样本量的前瞻性随机研究中进一步验证和调查。

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