Suppr超能文献

脊柱内肿瘤的微创手术与开放手术对比:基于15项观察性研究的荟萃分析

Minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for intraspinal tumors: a meta-analysis based on 15 observational studies.

作者信息

Xun Chuanhui, Li Haonan, Hu Yukun, Gao Shutao, Xu Jianlin, Wang Yanlong, Wang Ting, Sheng Weibin

机构信息

Department of Spine Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, 137 Liyushan Avenue, Xinshi District, Urumqi, 830054, Xinjiang, China.

Department of Operating Room, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urmuqi, 830054, China.

出版信息

J Orthop Surg Res. 2024 Dec 26;19(1):883. doi: 10.1186/s13018-024-05395-3.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study compared the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery (OS) for patients with intraspinal tumors.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases was conducted to identify relevant studies. Continuous variables, including estimated blood loss, surgery duration, time to mobilization, length of hospitalization, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and incision length, were reported as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Dichotomous variables, such as gross total resection, blood transfusion, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage, and overall complications, were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% CIs. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies, comprising a total of 943 patients (488 in the MIS group and 455 in the OS group), met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis indicated that MIS significantly reduced estimated blood loss (MD = -76.73, 95% CI -102.56 to -50.91, P < 0.01), incision length (MD = -4.09, 95% CI -5.20 to -2.97, P < 0.01), VAS score (MD = -0.79, 95% CI -1.48 to -0.11, P = 0.02), time to mobilization (MD = -4.27, 95% CI -5.12 to -3.43, P < 0.01), length of hospitalization, (MD = -3.94, 95% CI -5.05 to -2.84, P < 0.01), and overall complications (RR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.64, P < 0.01) compared with OS. No significant differences were observed in surgery duration (MD = -28.67, 95% CI -58.58 to 1.23, P = 0.06), gross total resection (RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.07, P = 0.92), blood transfusion (RR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.04, P = 0.06), or CSF leakage (RR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.04, P = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

Findings from this analysis suggest that MIS offers clinical advantages over OS in reducing blood loss, incision length, pain, time to mobilization, length of hospitalization, and overall complication rates.

摘要

目的

本研究比较了微创手术(MIS)和开放手术(OS)治疗脊髓内肿瘤患者的临床疗效。

方法

对PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、EMBASE、科学网、中国知网(CNKI)和万方数据库进行系统检索,以确定相关研究。连续变量,包括估计失血量、手术时间、活动时间、住院时间、视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分和切口长度,以平均差(MD)及95%置信区间(95%CI)报告。二分变量,如全切、输血、脑脊液(CSF)漏和总体并发症,以风险比(RR)及95%CI呈现。使用RevMan 5.3进行荟萃分析。

结果

15项研究共纳入943例患者(MIS组488例,OS组455例),符合纳入标准。荟萃分析表明,与OS相比,MIS显著减少了估计失血量(MD = -76.73,95%CI -102.56至-50.91,P < 0.01)、切口长度(MD = -4.09,95%CI -5.20至-2.97,P < 0.01)、VAS评分(MD = -0.79,95%CI -1.48至-0.11,P = 0.02)、活动时间(MD = -4.27,95%CI -5.12至-3.43,P < 0.01)、住院时间(MD = -3.94,95%CI -5.05至-2.84,P < 0.01)和总体并发症(RR = 0.40,95%CI 0.25至0.64,P < 0.01)。手术时间(MD = -28.67,95%CI -58.58至1.23,P = 0.06)、全切(RR = 1.00,95%CI 0.94至1.07,P = 0.92)、输血(RR = 0.23,95%CI 0.05至1.04,P = 0.06)或脑脊液漏(RR = 0.50,95%CI 0.24至1.04,P = 0.07)方面未观察到显著差异。

结论

该分析结果表明,在减少失血量、切口长度、疼痛、活动时间、住院时间和总体并发症发生率方面,MIS比OS具有临床优势。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b337/11670379/7c819aa79976/13018_2024_5395_Fig1_HTML.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