Manzur Mustfa K, Samuel Andre M, Morse Kyle W, Shafi Karim A, Gatto Bridget Jivanelli, Gang Catherine Himo, Qureshi Sheeraz A, Iyer Sravisht
Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Global Spine J. 2022 Jun;12(5):980-989. doi: 10.1177/21925682211013011. Epub 2021 May 20.
Systematic review.
Indirect decompression via lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) can ameliorate central and foraminal lumbar stenosis. In severe central stenosis, additional posterior direct decompression is utilized. The aim of this review is to synthesize existing literature on these 2 techniques and identify significant differences in outcomes between isolated indirect decompression via LLIF and combined indirect decompression supplemented with direct posterior decompression.
A database search algorithm was utilized to query MEDLINE, COCHRANE, and EMBASE to identify literature reporting adult decompression study groups that involved an oblique or lateral fusion approach through September 2020. Improvement in outcomes measures and complication rates were pooled and tested for significance.
A total of 110 publications were assessed with 15 studies meeting inclusion criteria, including 557 patients and 1008 levels. Mean age was 63.1 years with BMI of 27.5 kg/m. For the combined indirect and direct decompression cohort, lumbar lordosis (LL) increased 133.9%, from 22.8 to 48.7, while the indirect decompression cohort LL increased 8.9%, from 41.9 to 45.5. Difference in LL improvement between cohorts was insignificant ( > .05). Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) decreased from 36.5 to 19.4 in the combined indirect and direct decompression cohort, and from 44.4 to 23.1 in the indirect decompression cohort. ODI reduction was insignificant ( = .053).
Prior studies of both indirect decompression as well as combined indirect and direct decompression of lumbar spine stenosis are limited by small samples, heterogeneous populations, and lack of direct comparisons. Both procedures result in improved function and pain postoperatively with direct decompression restoring more lordosis in patients with worse preoperative alignment.
系统评价。
经外侧腰椎椎间融合术(LLIF)进行间接减压可改善中央型和椎间孔型腰椎管狭窄。在严重的中央型狭窄中,需额外进行后路直接减压。本综述的目的是综合关于这两种技术的现有文献,并确定单纯经LLIF间接减压与联合间接减压并辅以直接后路减压在疗效上的显著差异。
利用数据库搜索算法查询MEDLINE、COCHRANE和EMBASE,以识别截至2020年9月报告涉及斜行或外侧融合入路的成人减压研究组的文献。汇总疗效指标的改善情况和并发症发生率,并进行显著性检验。
共评估了110篇出版物,15项研究符合纳入标准,包括557例患者和1008个节段。平均年龄为63.1岁,体重指数为27.5kg/m。对于联合间接和直接减压队列,腰椎前凸(LL)增加了133.9%,从22.8增加到48.7,而间接减压队列的LL增加了8.9%,从41.9增加到45.5。队列间LL改善的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。联合间接和直接减压队列的Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)从36.5降至19.4,间接减压队列从44.4降至23.1。ODI降低无统计学意义(P=0.053)。
既往关于腰椎管狭窄间接减压以及联合间接和直接减压的研究受到样本量小、人群异质性和缺乏直接比较的限制。两种手术术后功能均有改善,疼痛减轻,直接减压可使术前对线较差的患者恢复更多前凸。