Department of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
Military University Hospital Prague, Prague, Czech Republic.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2023 Aug;94(8):657-666. doi: 10.1136/jnnp-2022-330158. Epub 2023 Feb 27.
To determine the efficacy of adding instrumented spinal fusion to decompression to treat degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS).
Systematic review with meta-analysis.
MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to May 2022.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing decompression with instrumented fusion to decompression alone in patients with DS. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. We provide the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessment of the certainty of evidence (COE).
We identified 4514 records and included four trials with 523 participants. At a 2-year follow-up, adding fusion to decompression likely results in trivial difference in the Oswestry Disability Index (range 0-100, with higher values indicating greater impairment) with mean difference (MD) 0.86 (95% CI -4.53 to 6.26; moderate COE). Similar results were observed for back and leg pain measured on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher values indicating more severe pain. There was a slightly increased improvement in back pain (2-year follow-up) in the group without fusion shown by MD -5·92 points (95% CI -11.00 to -0.84; moderate COE). There was a trivial difference in leg pain between the groups, slightly favouring the one without fusion, with MD -1.25 points (95% CI -6.71 to 4.21; moderate COE). Our findings at 2-year follow-up suggest that omitting fusion may increase the reoperation rate slightly (OR 1.23; 0.70 to 2.17; low COE).
Evidence suggests no benefits of adding instrumented fusion to decompression for treating DS. Isolated decompression seems sufficient for most patients. Further RCTs assessing spondylolisthesis stability are needed to determine which patients would benefit from fusion.
CRD42022308267.
确定减压联合脊柱融合内固定术治疗退行性腰椎滑脱症(DS)的疗效。
系统评价和荟萃分析。
从建库至 2022 年 5 月,检索 MEDLINE、Embase、Emcare、Cochrane 图书馆、CINAHL、Scopus、ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global、ClinicalTrials.gov 和世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台。
比较减压联合脊柱融合内固定术与单纯减压术治疗 DS 患者的随机对照试验(RCT)。两名审查员独立筛选研究,评估偏倚风险并提取数据。我们提供推荐分级的评估、制定与评价(GRADE)评估证据确定性(COE)的结果。
我们共筛选出 4514 条记录,纳入了 4 项试验共 523 名参与者。在 2 年的随访中,融合内固定术与单纯减压术相比,在 Oswestry 功能障碍指数(范围 0-100,得分越高表示功能障碍越严重)方面可能仅有轻微差异,平均差值(MD)为 0.86(95%可信区间-4.53 至 6.26;COE 为中等)。在腰痛和腿痛的评分(范围 0-100,得分越高表示疼痛越严重)上也观察到了类似的结果。未融合组的腰痛(2 年随访)改善更明显,MD 值为-5.92 分(95%可信区间-11.00 至-0.84;COE 为中等)。两组间腿痛差异较小,未融合组略有优势,MD 值为-1.25 分(95%可信区间-6.71 至 4.21;COE 为中等)。我们在 2 年随访时的发现表明,不进行融合内固定术可能会使再次手术率略有增加(OR 1.23;95%可信区间 0.70 至 2.17;COE 为低)。
证据表明,减压联合脊柱融合内固定术治疗 DS 并不能带来获益。单纯减压术对大多数患者来说已经足够了。需要进一步的 RCT 来评估脊柱滑脱的稳定性,以确定哪些患者需要融合术。
PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42022308267。