Orthopaedics Institute, Tianjin Hospital, Tianjin 300050, PR China.
Dali Bai Autonomous Prefecture People's Hospital, Dali 671000, PR China.
Int J Surg. 2017 Aug;44:329-338. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.07.032. Epub 2017 Jul 10.
Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) was a common degenerative disease that affected the lumbar spine function and quality of life, which can be treated both surgery and conservative treatment. We did this study to compare the effectiveness of surgery versus conservative treatment for LSS.
We searched PubMed as well as other databases in September.18th.2016. Randomized controlled trials compared surgery versus conservative treatment for patients with LSS were enrolled. Outcomes and complications were collected with data selection criteria and analyzed with Review Manager Version 5.3.
Nine RCTs (14 articles) and 1658 patients were included, and three of them were high-quality studies. At first 6 months after treatment, there were no significant differences for ODI scores between two therapeutic groups (P > 0.05), however, surgery group showed significant higher ODI scores at one year (P < 0.05) and two years (P < 0.05). Two studies reported no significant difference between laminectomy and conservative treatment for the SF-36 physical function scores at 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months (P > 0.05) and two studies reported patients were satisfied with X-STOP implanted at six weeks, six months, and one year. No statistical differences for the adverse events intra-operation or within 72 h (P > 0.05) between surgery and non-surgery groups. Moreover, subgroup analysis showed there were no safety differences between laminectomy and conservative treatment, X-STOP and conservative treatment at early stage of duration. However, the surgical groups had higher complication rates than non-surgery groups throughout the follow-up duration.
Surgery groups showed better late clinical outcomes after one year and higher complication rate throughout the follow-up duration, although it had no significant differences compared with conservative groups in the first six months post-treatment. However, there was no evidence that a definitive method could be firmly recommended to LSS patients. Further researches were needed to achieve high quality and credible results.
腰椎管狭窄症(LSS)是一种常见的退行性疾病,影响腰椎功能和生活质量,可采用手术和保守治疗。本研究旨在比较手术与保守治疗 LSS 的疗效。
我们于 2016 年 9 月 18 日检索了 PubMed 及其他数据库。纳入比较 LSS 患者手术与保守治疗的随机对照试验。采用数据选择标准收集结局和并发症,并使用 Review Manager Version 5.3 进行分析。
共纳入 9 项 RCT(14 篇文章)和 1658 例患者,其中 3 项为高质量研究。治疗后 6 个月时,两组间 ODI 评分无显著差异(P>0.05),但手术组治疗 1 年(P<0.05)和 2 年(P<0.05)时 ODI 评分显著更高。2 项研究报道,在术后 3 个月、6 个月、12 个月和 24 个月时,椎板切除术与保守治疗在 SF-36 躯体功能评分方面无显著差异(P>0.05),2 项研究报道 X-STOP 植入后 6 周、6 个月和 1 年时患者满意。手术组与非手术组术中或术后 72 h 内不良事件发生率无统计学差异(P>0.05)。此外,亚组分析显示,在治疗早期,椎板切除术与保守治疗、X-STOP 与保守治疗之间无安全性差异。然而,整个随访期间,手术组的并发症发生率高于非手术组。
手术组治疗 1 年后临床结局更好,但整个随访期间并发症发生率更高,尽管与治疗后前 6 个月的保守组相比,差异无统计学意义。然而,目前尚无证据可以明确推荐某种方法用于 LSS 患者。需要进一步研究以获得高质量和可靠的结果。