Suppr超能文献

内镜手术是腰椎间盘突出症的安全有效治疗方法吗?一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析。

Is Endoscopic Surgery a Safe and Effective Treatment for Lumbar Disc Herniation? A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

作者信息

Cai Bo-Tao, Yang Fan, Wang Deng-Chao

机构信息

Department of Orthopedics, Jintang County Second People's Hospital, JinTang, Chengdu, China.

Department of Spine Orthopedics, The 2nd Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, Nuclear Industry 416 Hospital, Chengdu, China.

出版信息

Global Spine J. 2025 Apr;15(3):1855-1868. doi: 10.1177/21925682241299326. Epub 2024 Nov 4.

Abstract

Study DesignSystematic Review.ObjectiveThis meta-analysis systematically evaluates the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic techniques in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH).MethodsA comprehensive computerized search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), VIP Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang Database. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing endoscopic techniques with non-endoscopic techniques for the treatment of LDH were identified. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.ResultsSeventeen RCTs involving 1748 LDH patients were analyzed. The meta-analysis revealed that, compared to the non-endoscopic discectomy (NED) group, the endoscopic discectomy (ED) group exhibited significantly lower intraoperative blood loss [MD = -74.45 mL, 95% CI (-124.88, -24.02), = .004], shorter hospitalization duration [MD = -4.07 days, 95% CI (-6.67, -1.48), = .002], lower Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain scores at the last follow-up [MD = -.35, 95% CI (-.63, -.07), = .01], and a lower incidence of complications [RR = .35, 95% CI (.25, .48), < .00001]. Moreover, the ED group exhibited a higher ratio of excellent and good therapeutic effects postoperatively [RR = 1.05, 95% CI (1.01, 1.10), = .01]. However, there were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores at the last follow-up [SMD = -.49, 95% CI (-1.14, .17), = .14] and operation time [MD = -10.17 min, 95% CI (-27.05, 6.71), = .24].ConclusionEndoscopic techniques in the treatment of LDH exhibit significant superiority in intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization duration, postoperative pain, complication rates, and postoperative therapeutic effects. This provides patients with a safer and more effective treatment option.

摘要

研究设计

系统评价。

目的

本荟萃分析系统评估内镜技术治疗腰椎间盘突出症(LDH)的安全性和有效性。

方法

对PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、维普数据库、中国知网(CNKI)和万方数据库进行全面的计算机检索。纳入比较内镜技术与非内镜技术治疗LDH的随机对照试验(RCT)。使用RevMan 5.4软件进行荟萃分析。

结果

分析了17项涉及1748例LDH患者的RCT。荟萃分析显示,与非内镜椎间盘切除术(NED)组相比,内镜椎间盘切除术(ED)组术中失血量显著更低[MD=-74.45 mL,95%CI(-124.88,-24.02),P=.004],住院时间更短[MD=-4.07天,95%CI(-6.67,-1.48),P=.002],末次随访时视觉模拟评分(VAS)疼痛评分更低[MD=-0.35,95%CI(-0.63,-0.07),P=.01],并发症发生率更低[RR=0.35,95%CI(0.25,0.48),P<.00001]。此外,ED组术后优良治疗效果的比例更高[RR=1.05,95%CI(1.01,1.10),P=.01]。然而,两组在末次随访时的Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)评分[SMD=-0.49,95%CI(-1.14,0.17),P=.14]和手术时间[MD=-10.17分钟,95%CI(-27.05,6.71),P=.24]方面无统计学显著差异。

结论

内镜技术治疗LDH在术中失血量、住院时间、术后疼痛、并发症发生率和术后治疗效果方面具有显著优势。这为患者提供了一种更安全、更有效的治疗选择。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e63d/11938505/cddeaef2bd87/10.1177_21925682241299326-fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验