Martin Christopher T, Ambrosio Luca, Cabrera Juan P, Chen Xiaolong, Cheung Jason Py, Hamouda Waeel, Le Hai V, Louie Philip K, Muthu Sathish, Singh Hardeep, Soliman Mohamed A R, Sotirios Veranis, Tavakoli Javad, Vetter Sven Y, Buser Zorica, Demetriades Andreas K, Diwan Ashish, Hsieh Patrick C, Jain Amit, Vadalà Gianluca, Fisher Charles G, Yoon S Tim
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Global Spine J. 2025 Jun 11:21925682251336755. doi: 10.1177/21925682251336755.
Study DesignLiterature review.ObjectiveTo provide a concise review of outcomes of decompression and fusion (D + F) vs decompression (D) alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).Methods6 articles were selected, including 3 randomized clinical trials (RCT), 2 meta-analyses, and 1 radiographic cohort study. Summarized factors affecting the outcomes of D + F vs D alone for DLS and provide expert level clinical recommendations.ResultsGhogawala included DLS patients showing improved SF-36 scores ( = 0.046) and lower re-operation rates ( = 0.05) in D + F patients compared to D alone. Forsth, included patients with stenosis both with and without DLS, and showed no difference in any reported outcome measure or reoperation rate. Austevoll included DLS patients that found that D alone was non-inferior to D + F in the primary outcome measure of ODI reduction at 2-year after surgery. Gadjradi included studies showing higher morbidity in the D + F group, as compared to D alone. Shukla included studies which found there was no difference in the raw patient outcome scores at final follow-up. Blumenthal included DLS patients who received D and reported disc height of >6.5 mm, facet angle >50°, and dynamic motion >1.25 mm were associated with high re-operation rates (45%, 39%, and 54% respectively).ConclusionsThe RCT's and meta-analyses report contradictory conclusions and no blanket statement regarding the efficacy of D + F vs D alone can be made for all patients with DLS. Surgeons should closely review pre-operative imaging for signs of instability in order to better identify appropriate patients for each indication.
研究设计
文献综述。
目的
对退行性腰椎滑脱症(DLS)减压融合术(D + F)与单纯减压术(D)的治疗结果进行简要综述。
方法
选取6篇文章,包括3项随机临床试验(RCT)、2项荟萃分析和1项影像学队列研究。总结影响DLS患者D + F与单纯D治疗结果的因素,并提供专家级临床建议。
结果
Ghogawala研究纳入的DLS患者中,与单纯D组相比,D + F组患者的SF-36评分改善(P = 0.046)且再次手术率较低(P = 0.05)。Forsth研究纳入了伴有和不伴有DLS的椎管狭窄患者,在任何报告的结局指标或再次手术率方面均未显示出差异。Austevoll研究纳入的DLS患者发现,在术后2年ODI降低的主要结局指标方面,单纯D并不劣于D + F。Gadjradi研究纳入的研究显示,与单纯D组相比,D + F组的发病率更高。Shukla研究纳入的研究发现,最终随访时患者原始结局评分无差异。Blumenthal研究纳入的DLS患者接受单纯D治疗,报告椎间盘高度>6.5mm、小关节角度>50°和动态活动>1.25mm与高再次手术率相关(分别为45%、39%和54%)。
结论
RCT和荟萃分析报告了相互矛盾的结论,对于所有DLS患者,无法就D + F与单纯D的疗效做出一概而论的陈述。外科医生应仔细复查术前影像学检查以寻找不稳定迹象,以便更好地为每种适应症确定合适的患者。