Xiaogan Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Xiaogan, P.R. China.
The Wuhan Hospital of Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Wuhan, P.R. China.
World Neurosurg. 2022 Aug;164:e436-e445. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.04.129. Epub 2022 May 6.
Pedicular screws (PS) often are used in lumbar fusion. Cortical bone trajectory (CBT) is a novel technology in lumbar fusion with less evidence of clinical outcomes. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety between CBT screw fixation and traditional PS in lumbar fusion surgery.
Multiple databases were searched for the articles that compared CBT and traditional PS in lumbar fusion surgeries. Meta-analysis was conducted by RevMan 5.3 software. The following indicators were abstracted: visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, surgical duration, complications, and blood loss. The quality of the articles was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale or Cochrane Handbook.
In total, 25 studies were included, involving a total of 1735 patients. There was no difference in preoperative VAS scores, JOA, ODI, postoperative VAS scores, and fusion rates. In addition, postoperative JOA (mean difference [MD] = 0.78, P = 0.02), ODI (MD = -2.09, P = 0.03), surgical duration (MD = -26.90, P = 0.02), complications (MD = 0.70, P = 0.03), and blood loss (MD = -85.27, P = 0.0009) showed greater improvement trends in the CBT group than the PS group, with significant difference.
CBT reduced the rate of complications, surgical duration, blood loss, postoperative ODI, and JOA scores. The CBT technique, with better postoperative outcomes, achieved similar fusion rates compared with the PS technique.
经皮椎弓根螺钉(PS)常用于腰椎融合术。皮质骨轨道(CBT)是一种新型的腰椎融合技术,其临床疗效证据较少。因此,我们进行了一项荟萃分析,比较了 CBT 螺钉固定与传统 PS 在腰椎融合术中的疗效和安全性。
在多个数据库中搜索比较 CBT 和传统 PS 在腰椎融合术中应用的文章。使用 RevMan 5.3 软件进行荟萃分析。提取以下指标:腰背疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry 功能障碍指数(ODI)、日本骨科协会(JOA)评分、手术时间、并发症和出血量。通过纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表或 Cochrane 手册评估文章的质量。
共纳入 25 项研究,共 1735 例患者。两组患者术前 VAS 评分、JOA、ODI 评分、术后 VAS 评分和融合率差异均无统计学意义。此外,CBT 组术后 JOA(均数差 [MD] = 0.78,P = 0.02)、ODI(MD = -2.09,P = 0.03)、手术时间(MD = -26.90,P = 0.02)、并发症(MD = 0.70,P = 0.03)和出血量(MD = -85.27,P = 0.0009)的改善趋势更大,差异均有统计学意义。
CBT 可降低并发症发生率、手术时间、出血量、术后 ODI 和 JOA 评分。与 PS 技术相比,CBT 技术并发症发生率更低,手术时间、出血量更少,术后疗效更好,融合率相当。