Department of Neurological Surgery, Brain and Spine Center, Weill Cornell, New York, NY, USA.
Eur Spine J. 2023 Mar;32(3):1054-1067. doi: 10.1007/s00586-022-07507-1. Epub 2023 Jan 6.
Surgical decompression is standard care in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis, but there remains controversy over the benefits of adding fusion. The persistent lack of consensus on this matter and the availability of new data warrants a contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.
Multiple online databases were systematically searched up to October 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies comparing outcomes of decompression alone versus decompression with fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index. Secondary outcomes included leg and back pain, surgical outcomes, and radiological outcomes. Pooled effect estimates were calculated and presented as mean differences (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) at two-year follow-up.
Of the identified 2403 studies, eventually five RCTs and two prospective studies were included. Overall, most studies had a low or unclear risk of selection bias and most studies were focused on low grade degenerative spondylolisthesis. All patient-reported outcomes showed low statistical heterogeneity. Overall, there was high-quality evidence suggesting no difference in functionality at two years of follow-up (MD - 0.31, 95% CI - 3.81 to 3.19). Furthermore, there was high-quality evidence of no difference in leg pain (MD - 1.79, 95% CI - 5.08 to 1.50) or back pain (MD - 2.54, 95% CI - 6.76 to 1.67) between patients undergoing decompression vs. decompression with fusion. Pooled surgical outcomes showed less blood loss after decompression only, shorter length of hospital stay, and a similar reoperation rate compared to decompression with fusion.
Based on the current literature, there is high-quality evidence of no difference in functionality after decompression alone compared to decompression with fusion in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at 2 years of follow-up. Further studies should focus on long-term comparative outcomes, health economic evaluations, and identifying those patients that may benefit more from decompression with fusion instead of decompression alone. This review was registered at Prospero (CRD42021291603).
在有症状的腰椎管狭窄症患者中,手术减压是退行性腰椎滑脱症的标准治疗方法,但在融合是否有益方面仍存在争议。鉴于这一问题始终缺乏共识,并且新数据的出现,有必要对现有文献进行当代系统回顾和荟萃分析。
系统检索了多个在线数据库,截至 2022 年 10 月,以获取比较单纯减压与减压加融合治疗退行性腰椎滑脱伴腰椎管狭窄症患者的结局的随机对照试验(RCT)和前瞻性研究。主要结局是 Oswestry 功能障碍指数。次要结局包括腿部和背部疼痛、手术结局和影像学结局。计算并呈现了两年随访时的汇总效应估计值,以均数差(MD)及其 95%置信区间(CI)表示。
在确定的 2403 项研究中,最终纳入了 5 项 RCT 和 2 项前瞻性研究。总体而言,大多数研究的选择偏倚风险较低或不明确,大多数研究都集中在低等级退行性腰椎滑脱症。所有患者报告的结局均显示出较低的统计学异质性。总体而言,高质量证据表明,在两年随访时,功能方面没有差异(MD-0.31,95%CI-3.81 至 3.19)。此外,在腿部疼痛(MD-1.79,95%CI-5.08 至 1.50)或背部疼痛(MD-2.54,95%CI-6.76 至 1.67)方面,接受减压与减压加融合的患者之间也没有差异。汇总的手术结局显示,仅减压后失血量更少,住院时间更短,且与减压加融合相比,再次手术率相似。
根据现有文献,在 2 年随访时,与减压加融合相比,单纯减压治疗退行性腰椎滑脱症患者的功能无差异,具有高质量证据。进一步的研究应侧重于长期比较结局、健康经济学评估,并确定那些可能从减压加融合而非单纯减压中获益更多的患者。本综述已在 Prospero(CRD42021291603)上注册。