Chen Li-Ye, Liang Hao-Dong, Qin Qi-Ning, Tian Tian-Zhao, Liu Bao-Xin, Shi Min, Cai Ying-Feng
Department of Orthopaedics, The Affiliated TCM Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510130, People's Republic of China.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Nov 13;99(46):e23223. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023223.
Low back pain (LBP) is high prevalent and it is the leading cause of years lived with disability in both developed and developing countries. The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) is a common reason that caused LBP. At present, the treatment of chronic LBP attributed to SIJ is mainly conservative treatment and surgical treatment. However, there are still controversies between the 2 treating methods, and there is no recognized standard of treatment or surgical indications. Recent publications indicated that minimally invasive sacroiliac joint arthrodesis was safe and more effective improving pain, disability, and quality of life compared with conservative management in 2 years follow-up, which re-raise the focus of sacroiliac joints fusion. This paper will systematically review the available evidence, comparing the effectiveness of sacroiliac joint fusion and conservative therapy for the treatment of gait retraining for patients suffered from LBP attributed to the sacroiliac joint.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of relevant studies in Pubmed, Embase, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library will be synthesized. Inclusion criteria will be studies evaluating clinical outcomes (i.e., changes to pain and/or function) comparing sacroiliac joint fusion and conservative therapy in populations sacroiliac join related LBP; studies with less than 10 participants in total will be excluded. The primary outcomes measured will be pain score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and adverse events during treatment. Review Manager (Revman; Version 5.3) software will be used for data synthesis, sensitivity analysis, meta-regression, subgroup analysis, and risk of bias assessment. A funnel plot will be developed to evaluate reporting bias and Begg and Egger tests will be used to assess funnel plot symmetries. We will use the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system to assess the quality of evidence.
Our aim is to publish this systematic review and meta-analysis in a peer-reviewed journal. Our findings will provide information comparing the efficacy and safety comparing sacroiliac joint fusion and non-surgical treatment for patients with LBP attributed to the sacroiliac joint. This review will not require ethical approval as there are no issues about participant privacy.
下腰痛(LBP)非常普遍,是发达国家和发展中国家导致残疾生存年数的主要原因。骶髂关节(SIJ)是引起LBP的常见原因。目前,归因于SIJ的慢性LBP的治疗主要是保守治疗和手术治疗。然而,这两种治疗方法之间仍存在争议,且尚无公认的治疗标准或手术指征。最近的出版物表明,在2年的随访中,与保守治疗相比,微创骶髂关节融合术在改善疼痛、残疾和生活质量方面是安全且更有效的,这再次引发了对骶髂关节融合术的关注。本文将系统回顾现有证据,比较骶髂关节融合术与保守治疗对因骶髂关节导致LBP患者进行步态再训练的有效性。
将综合对PubMed、Embase、SCOPUS和Cochrane图书馆中相关研究的系统评价和荟萃分析。纳入标准将是评估临床结果(即疼痛和/或功能变化)的研究,比较骶髂关节融合术与保守治疗在骶髂关节相关LBP人群中的效果;总参与者少于10人的研究将被排除。测量的主要结果将是疼痛评分、Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)和治疗期间的不良事件。将使用Review Manager(Revman;5.3版)软件进行数据合成、敏感性分析、元回归、亚组分析和偏倚风险评估。将绘制漏斗图以评估报告偏倚,并使用Begg和Egger检验评估漏斗图的对称性。我们将使用推荐分级评估、制定和评价系统来评估证据质量。
我们的目标是在同行评审期刊上发表这一系统评价和荟萃分析。我们的研究结果将提供信息,比较骶髂关节融合术与非手术治疗对因骶髂关节导致LBP患者的疗效和安全性。由于不存在参与者隐私问题,本综述无需伦理批准。