Meta-Analysis of Circumferential Fusion Versus Posterolateral Fusion in Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

被引:20
|
作者
Liu, Xiao-Yang
Wang, Yi-Peng [1 ]
Qiu, Gui-Xing
Weng, Xi-Sheng
Yu, Bin
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Med Sci, Dept Orthoped Surg, Peking Union Med Coll Hosp, Beijing 100730, Peoples R China
来源
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES | 2014年 / 27卷 / 08期
关键词
meta-analysis; circumferential fusion; posterolateral fusion; lumbar fusion; spondylolisthesis; POSTERIOR INTERBODY FUSION; GRADE ISTHMIC SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; UPDATED METHOD GUIDELINES; PEDICLE SCREW FIXATION; DEGENERATIVE DISEASE; SPONDYLOLYTIC SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; SPINE; ANTERIOR; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1097/BSD.0000000000000116
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design: Literature review and meta-analysis. Summary of Background Data: Posterolateral fusion (PLF) and circumferential fusion (CF) were widely used in the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis. There was a great controversy over the preferred fusion method. Objective: We performed a meta-analysis for determining which fusion method was better in lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Collaboration Library from January 1960 to December 2013. Comparative studies were selected according to eligibility criteria. Weighed mean differences (WMDs) and risk differences were calculated. The final strength of evidence was expressed as different levels recommended by the GRADE Working Group. Results: Eight comparative studies were identified. There was less evidence that no significant difference was found between CF and PLF for clinical satisfaction [odds ratio (OR), 0.63; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.30, 1.32; P = 0.22)] and for complication rate (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.23, 1.76; P = 0.39). The PLF was more effective than the CF for the reduction of complication rate for patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23, 0.86; P = 0.02). There was no significant difference for fusion rate, reoperation rate, operating time, and blood loss. Subanalysis showed that the CF can increase the fusion rate of patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.01, 1.00; P = 0.05). PLF was more effective than CF for the reduction in operating time (WMD = -75.68; 95% CI, -99.00, -52.37; P < 0.00001), and CF was more effective than PLF for the restoration of segment lordosis, disk height, and spondylolisthesis. Conclusions: There was really no difference for clinical satisfaction, complication rate, fusion rate, reoperation rate, operating time, and blood loss. PLF can reduce complication rate and operating time. CF can improve fusion rate for individuals with isthmic spondylolisthesis and restore lumbar alignment. The level of evidence was low.
引用
收藏
页码:E282 / E293
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus instrumented posterolateral fusion in Grade I/II spondylolisthesis
    Pooswamy, Shanmugasundaram
    Muralidharagopalan, Niranjanan Raghavn
    Subbaiah, Sivasubramaniam
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS, 2017, 51 (02) : 131 - 138
  • [22] Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus instrumented posterolateral fusion in Grade I/II spondylolisthesis
    Shanmugasundaram Pooswamy
    Niranjanan Raghavn Muralidharagopalan
    Sivasubramaniam Subbaiah
    Indian Journal of Orthopaedics, 2017, 51 : 131 - 138
  • [23] Circumferential and posterolateral fusion for lumbar disc disease
    Madan, SS
    Harley, JM
    Boeree, NR
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2003, (409) : 114 - 123
  • [24] Efficacy and Safety of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Liu, Ai-Feng
    Guo, Tian-Ci
    Chen, Ji-Xin
    Yu, Wei-Jie
    Feng, Hui-Chuan
    Niu, Pu-Yu
    Zhai, Jing-Bo
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2022, 158 : E964 - E974
  • [25] Letter regarding Liu et al.'s study entitled "A systematic review with meta-analysis of posterior interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in lumbar spondylolisthesis"
    Li, Feng
    Huo, Hongjun
    Xiao, Yulong
    Xing, Wenhua
    Xia, Hong
    Yang, Xuejun
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2014, 23 (04) : 933 - 934
  • [26] Letter regarding Liu et al.’s study entitled “A systematic review with meta-analysis of posterior interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in lumbar spondylolisthesis”
    Feng Li
    Hongjun Huo
    Yulong Xiao
    Wenhua Xing
    Hong Xia
    Xuejun Yang
    European Spine Journal, 2014, 23 : 933 - 934
  • [27] Clinical effectiveness of reduction and fusion versus in situ fusion in the management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Wang, Dongfan
    Wang, Wei
    Han, Di
    Muthu, Sathish
    Cabrera, Juan P.
    Hamouda, Waeel
    Ambrosio, Luca
    Cheung, Jason P. Y.
    Le, Hai V.
    Vadala, Gianluca
    Buser, Zorica
    Wang, Jeffrey C.
    Cho, Samuel
    Yoon, S. Tim
    Lu, Shibao
    Chen, Xiaolong
    Diwan, Ashish D.
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2024, 33 (05) : 1748 - 1761
  • [28] Posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in spondylolisthesis: a prospective controlled study in the Han nationality
    Cheng, Lei
    Nie, Lin
    Zhang, Li
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2009, 33 (04) : 1043 - 1047
  • [29] Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Posterolateral Fusion Alone in the Treatment of Grade 1 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis
    Tang, Alan R.
    Chanbour, Hani
    Steinle, Anthony M.
    Jonzzon, Soren
    Roth, Steven G.
    Gardocki, Raymond J.
    Stephens, Byron F.
    Abtahi, Amir M.
    Zuckerman, Scott L.
    NEUROSURGERY, 2023, 93 (01) : 186 - 197
  • [30] Posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in spondylolisthesis: a prospective controlled study in the Han nationality
    Lei Cheng
    Lin Nie
    Li Zhang
    International Orthopaedics, 2009, 33 : 1043 - 1047