• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

斜向腰椎间融合术与微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术治疗腰椎退行性疾病的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics, The Second People's Hospital of Changzhi City, Changzhi, People's Republic of China.

Graduate School, Changzhi Medical College, Changzhi, People's Republic of China.

出版信息

Neurosurg Rev. 2023 Apr 29;46(1):100. doi: 10.1007/s10143-023-02009-0.

DOI:10.1007/s10143-023-02009-0
PMID:37119422
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10148790/
Abstract

This meta-analysis compared the efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. A computer search for the published literature on OLIF and MIS-TLIF for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and other databases was performed, from which 522 related articles were retrieved and 13 were finally included. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the included studies and analyzed them using RevMan 5.4. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane systematic analysis and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analysis showed that the blood loss [95% confidence intervals (CI) (- 121.01, - 54.56), [Formula: see text]], hospital stay [95% CI (- 1.98, - 0.85), [Formula: see text]], postoperative fusion rate [95%CI (1.04, 3.60), [Formula: see text]], postoperative disc height [95% CI (0.50, 3.63), [Formula: see text]], and postoperative foraminal height [95% CI (0.96, 4.13), [Formula: see text]] were all better in the OLIF group; however, the complication rates were significantly lower in the MIS-TLIF group [95% CI (1.01, 2.06), [Formula: see text]]. However, there were no significant differences between the two in terms of surgery time, patient satisfaction, or postoperative functional scores. The OLIF group had the advantages of lower blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, a higher postoperative fusion rate, and better recovery of the disc and foraminal heights, whereas MIS-TLIF had a relatively lower complication rate.

摘要

这项荟萃分析比较了斜外侧腰椎椎间融合术(OLIF)和微创经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(MIS-TLIF)治疗腰椎退行性疾病的疗效。计算机检索 PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、CINAHL、MEDLINE、Cochrane 图书馆和其他数据库中关于 OLIF 和 MIS-TLIF 治疗腰椎退行性疾病的已发表文献,共检索到 522 篇相关文章,最终纳入 13 篇。两位评价者独立提取纳入研究的数据,并使用 RevMan 5.4 进行分析。使用 Cochrane 系统评价和 Newcastle-Ottawa 量表评估研究质量。Meta 分析显示,OLIF 组术中出血量[95%可信区间(CI)(-121.01,-54.56),[Formula: see text]]、住院时间[95%CI(-1.98,-0.85),[Formula: see text]]、术后融合率[95%CI(1.04,3.60),[Formula: see text]]、术后椎间盘高度[95%CI(0.50,3.63),[Formula: see text]]和术后椎间孔高度[95%CI(0.96,4.13),[Formula: see text]]均优于 MIS-TLIF 组;然而,MIS-TLIF 组的并发症发生率显著较低[95%CI(1.01,2.06),[Formula: see text]]。然而,两组在手术时间、患者满意度或术后功能评分方面无显著差异。OLIF 组具有术中出血量少、住院时间短、术后融合率高、椎间盘和椎间孔高度恢复较好的优势,而 MIS-TLIF 组的并发症发生率相对较低。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/651839f68cf9/10143_2023_2009_Fig16_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/305754eeec29/10143_2023_2009_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/389f7c08669a/10143_2023_2009_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/91499e2afc56/10143_2023_2009_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/af6e54fbd862/10143_2023_2009_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/f8749a21c1e4/10143_2023_2009_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/313a50004172/10143_2023_2009_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/0c05bbd65827/10143_2023_2009_Fig7_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/853214afe942/10143_2023_2009_Fig8_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/8e8252c1af8c/10143_2023_2009_Fig9_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/9fb2d6919529/10143_2023_2009_Fig10_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/3b9da439210c/10143_2023_2009_Fig11_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/02ff6f488331/10143_2023_2009_Fig12_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/7dad7b5943dc/10143_2023_2009_Fig13_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/c9ca6a27414e/10143_2023_2009_Fig14_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/a2325594e027/10143_2023_2009_Fig15_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/651839f68cf9/10143_2023_2009_Fig16_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/305754eeec29/10143_2023_2009_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/389f7c08669a/10143_2023_2009_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/91499e2afc56/10143_2023_2009_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/af6e54fbd862/10143_2023_2009_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/f8749a21c1e4/10143_2023_2009_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/313a50004172/10143_2023_2009_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/0c05bbd65827/10143_2023_2009_Fig7_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/853214afe942/10143_2023_2009_Fig8_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/8e8252c1af8c/10143_2023_2009_Fig9_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/9fb2d6919529/10143_2023_2009_Fig10_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/3b9da439210c/10143_2023_2009_Fig11_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/02ff6f488331/10143_2023_2009_Fig12_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/7dad7b5943dc/10143_2023_2009_Fig13_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/c9ca6a27414e/10143_2023_2009_Fig14_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/a2325594e027/10143_2023_2009_Fig15_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4997/10148790/651839f68cf9/10143_2023_2009_Fig16_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.斜向腰椎间融合术与微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术治疗腰椎退行性疾病的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Neurosurg Rev. 2023 Apr 29;46(1):100. doi: 10.1007/s10143-023-02009-0.
2
Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus oblique lateral interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a meta-analysis.微创经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术与斜外侧腰椎体间融合术治疗腰椎退行性疾病的疗效比较:一项荟萃分析。
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Sep 18;22(1):802. doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04687-7.
3
Comparison of Outcomes between Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Single-Level Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.机器人辅助微创经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术与单节段腰椎滑脱症斜侧方腰椎体间融合术的疗效比较。
Orthop Surg. 2021 Oct;13(7):2093-2101. doi: 10.1111/os.13151. Epub 2021 Oct 1.
4
Efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.斜外侧腰椎间融合术与经椎间孔腰椎间融合术治疗腰椎退变性疾病的疗效比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023 Sep;143(9):5657-5670. doi: 10.1007/s00402-023-04880-4. Epub 2023 Apr 20.
5
Comparing the efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.单侧双通道内镜下经椎间孔腰椎间融合术与微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术治疗腰椎退变性疾病的疗效比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Orthop Surg Res. 2023 Nov 22;18(1):888. doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-04393-1.
6
Short-term clinical efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.单侧双通道内镜下经椎间孔腰椎间融合术与微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术治疗腰椎退变性疾病的短期临床疗效及安全性的系统评价和 Meta 分析。
J Orthop Surg Res. 2023 Sep 4;18(1):656. doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-04138-0.
7
[Clinical and radiologic comparison between oblique lateral interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis].[斜外侧椎间融合术与微创经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术治疗退行性腰椎滑脱症的临床与影像学比较]
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2023 May 25;36(5):414-9. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.2023.05.004.
8
Minimally invasive surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis: transforaminal or oblique lumbar interbody fusion.退变性腰椎滑脱症的微创治疗:经椎间孔或斜外侧腰椎体间融合术。
J Comp Eff Res. 2020 Jan;9(1):45-51. doi: 10.2217/cer-2019-0055. Epub 2019 Dec 16.
9
[Comparison of clinical effect and muscle injury imaging between oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis].斜外侧腰椎椎间融合术与经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术治疗单节段退变性腰椎管狭窄症的临床疗效及肌肉损伤影像学比较
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2023 May 25;36(5):420-7. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.2023.05.005.
10
Efficacy and Safety of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.斜向腰椎间融合术与经椎间孔腰椎间融合术治疗退行性腰椎滑脱症的疗效和安全性:系统评价和荟萃分析。
World Neurosurg. 2022 Feb;158:e964-e974. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.11.127. Epub 2021 Dec 3.

引用本文的文献

1
Oral extract promotes lumbar interbody fusion by enhancing vascularization of cartilage endplate.口服提取物通过增强软骨终板的血管生成促进腰椎椎间融合。
Front Surg. 2025 Aug 29;12:1652156. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1652156. eCollection 2025.
2
Fusion rate and complications of oblique lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a meta-analysis.斜外侧腰椎椎间融合术与经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术治疗腰椎退行性疾病的融合率及并发症:一项Meta分析
Front Surg. 2024 Apr 30;11:1374134. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2024.1374134. eCollection 2024.
3
Fusion Assessment of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Demineralized Bone Matrix: A 2-Year Prospective Study.

本文引用的文献

1
Small Preoperative Dural Sac Cross-Sectional Area and Anteriorly Placed Fusion Cages Are Risk Factors for Indirect Decompression Failure after Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion.术前硬脊膜囊横截面积小和前方融合 cage 放置与斜外侧椎间融合术后间接减压失败有关。
World Neurosurg. 2022 Nov;167:e1032-e1044. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.08.134. Epub 2022 Sep 5.
2
Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion vs. Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.斜外侧椎间融合术与微创经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术治疗腰椎管狭窄症:一项回顾性队列研究
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 May 19;9:829426. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.829426. eCollection 2022.
3
使用脱矿骨基质对斜外侧腰椎椎间融合术进行融合评估:一项为期2年的前瞻性研究。
Neurospine. 2023 Dec;20(4):1205-1216. doi: 10.14245/ns.2347032.516. Epub 2023 Dec 31.
4
Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and minimal invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF): we should not compare two procedures that serve different purposes.斜外侧腰椎椎间融合术(OLIF)和微创经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(MIS TLIF):我们不应比较两种目的不同的手术。
Neurosurg Rev. 2023 May 8;46(1):111. doi: 10.1007/s10143-023-02024-1.
Comparison between Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MISTLIF) for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.
腰椎滑脱症的斜侧腰椎间融合术(OLIF)与微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术(MISTLIF)比较
Neurol India. 2022 Jan-Feb;70(1):127-134. doi: 10.4103/0028-3886.338732.
4
Clinical and Radiographic Comparisons among Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparison with Three-Way Matching.微创腰椎椎间融合术的临床与影像学比较:与三向匹配的对比
Asian Spine J. 2022 Oct;16(5):712-722. doi: 10.31616/asj.2021.0264. Epub 2022 Jan 25.
5
Endo-TLIF versus MIS-TLIF in 1-segment lumbar spondylolisthesis: A prospective randomized pilot study.单节段腰椎滑脱症的经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(Endo-TLIF)与微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(MIS-TLIF)的前瞻性随机试点研究。
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2022 Jan;212:107082. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2021.107082. Epub 2021 Dec 1.
6
Comparison of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion (OLIF) and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MI-TLIF) for Treatment of Lumbar Degeneration Disease: A Prospective Cohort Study.斜外侧腰椎间融合术(OLIF)与微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术(MI-TLIF)治疗腰椎退变性疾病的比较:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2022 Mar 15;47(6):E233-E242. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004303.
7
Comparison of Outcomes between Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Single-Level Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.机器人辅助微创经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术与单节段腰椎滑脱症斜侧方腰椎体间融合术的疗效比较。
Orthop Surg. 2021 Oct;13(7):2093-2101. doi: 10.1111/os.13151. Epub 2021 Oct 1.
8
Comparison of Clinical Outcome and Radiologic Parameters in Open TLIF Versus MIS-TLIF in Single- or Double-Level Lumbar Surgeries.单节段或双节段腰椎手术中开放经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术与微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术的临床结果及影像学参数比较
Int J Spine Surg. 2021 Oct;15(5):962-970. doi: 10.14444/8126. Epub 2021 Sep 22.
9
Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus oblique lateral interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a meta-analysis.微创经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术与斜外侧腰椎体间融合术治疗腰椎退行性疾病的疗效比较:一项荟萃分析。
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Sep 18;22(1):802. doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04687-7.
10
Comparison of outcomes between indirect decompression of oblique lumbar interbody fusion and MIS-TLIF in one single-level lumbar spondylosis.对比单节段腰椎退变性疾病中斜外侧椎间融合术与微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术的疗效。
Sci Rep. 2021 Jun 17;11(1):12783. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-92330-9.