首页> 外文期刊>Asian spine journal. >Decompression Surgery versus Interspinous Devices for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review of the Literature
【24h】

Decompression Surgery versus Interspinous Devices for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review of the Literature

机译:减压手术与腰椎狭窄的梭孔装置:对文献的系统审查

获取原文
           

摘要

In this retrospective review study, the authors systematically reviewed the literature to elucidate the efficacy and complications associated with decompression and interspinous devices (ISDs) used in surgeries for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). LSS is a debilitating condition that affects the lumbar spinal cord and spinal nerve roots. However, a comprehensive report on the relative efficacy and complication rate of ISDs as they compare to traditional decompression procedures is currently lacking. The PubMed database was queried to identify clinical studies that exclusively investigated decompression, those that exclusively investigated ISDs, and those that compared decompression with ISDs. Only prospective cohort studies, case series, and randomized controlled trials that evaluated outcomes using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index, or Japanese Orthopedic Association scores were included. A random-effects model was established to assess the difference between preoperative and the 1–2-year postoperative VAS scores between ISD surgery and lumbar decompression. This study included 40 papers that matched our criteria. Twenty-five decompression-exclusive clinical trials with 3,386 patients and a mean age of 68.7 years (range, 31–88 years) reported a 2.2% incidence rate of dural tears and a 2.6% incidence rate of postoperative infections. Eight ISD-exclusive clinical trials with 1,496 patients and a mean age of 65.1 (range, 19–89 years) reported a 5.3% incidence rate of postoperative leg pain and a 3.7% incidence rate of spinous process fractures. Seven studies that compared ISDs and decompression in 624 patients found a reoperation rate of 8.3% in ISD patients vs. 3.9% in decompression patients; they also reported dural tears in 0.32% of ISD patients vs. 5.2% in decompression patients. A meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials found that the differences in preoperative and postoperative VAS scores between the two groups were not significant. Both decompression and ISD interventions are unique surgical interventions with different therapeutic efficacies and complications. The collected studies do not consistently demonstrate superiority of either procedure over the other but understanding the differences between the two techniques can help tailor treatment regimens for patients with LSS.
机译:在这项回顾性审查研究中,作者系统地审查了文献,以阐明腰椎脊柱狭窄(LSS)的手术中使用的减压和梭菌装置(ISDS)相关的疗效和并发症。 LSS是一种影响腰椎脊髓和脊髓神经根的衰弱条件。然而,目前缺乏关于与传统减压程序相比的相对疗效和isds相对疗效和并发症率的全面报告。查询了PubMed数据库以确定专门调查减压的临床研究,专门调查ISDS的人以及与ISDS进行减少减压的人。仅包括使用视觉模拟量表(VAS),OSWestry残疾指数或日本矫形协会分数评估结果的预期队列研究,案例系列和随机对照试验。建立了一种随机效应模型,以评估术前与ISD手术和腰椎减压术后1-2岁的术后VAS分数之间的差异。本研究包括40篇符合我们标准的论文。具有3,386名患者的二十五个减压 - 独家临床试验,平均年龄为68.7岁(31-88岁)报告了2.2%的多云撕裂发病率和术后感染的2.6%发病率。具有1,496名患者的八个ISD-独家临床试验和65.1(范围,19-89岁的平均年龄)报告术后腿部疼痛的5.3%发病率和棘突骨折的3.7%发生率。七项研究表明,在624名患者中比较了ISDS和减压的研究发现,ISD患者的重组率为8.3%,对减压患者的3.9%;他们还报告了在减压患者的0.32%的ISD患者中的Dural泪水。减压患者的5.2%。随机对照试验的荟萃分析发现,两组之间术前和术后VAS分数的差异并不重要。减压和ISD干预都是独特的手术干预,具有不同的治疗效率和并发症。收集的研究并未始终如一地证明其两种方法的优越性,而是了解两种技术之间的差异可以帮助LSS患者定制治疗方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号