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
  • [41] Posterolateral versus Posterior Interbody Fusion in Isthmic Spondylolisthesis
    Farrokhi, Majid Reza
    Rahmanian, Abdolkarim
    Masoudi, Mohammad Sadegh
    JOURNAL OF NEUROTRAUMA, 2012, 29 (08) : 1567 - 1573
  • [42] Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?
    Fujimori, Takahito
    Le, Hai
    Schairer, William W.
    Berven, Sigurd H.
    Qamirani, Erion
    Hu, Serena S.
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 5 (02) : 102 - 109
  • [43] Management of lumbar spondylolisthesis: A retrospective analysis of posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
    Santos, Daniel Encarnacion
    Nurmukhametov, Renat
    Donasov, Medet
    Volovich, Alexander
    Bozkurt, Ismail
    Wellington, Jack
    Lendof, Miguel Espinal
    Peralta, Ismael
    Chaurasia, Bipin
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOVERTEBRAL JUNCTION AND SPINE, 2024, 15 (01): : 99 - 104
  • [44] Interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in treatment of low grade lytic spondylolisthesis
    Abdelkader, Saad Gad
    El Zahlawy, Hany Nabil
    Elkhateeb, Tameem Mohamed
    ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA BELGICA, 2019, 85 (03): : 269 - 273
  • [45] POSTEROLATERAL FUSION FOR SPONDYLOLISTHESIS IN ADOLESCENCE
    PIZZUTILLO, PD
    MIRENDA, W
    MACEWEN, GD
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC ORTHOPAEDICS, 1986, 6 (03) : 311 - 316
  • [46] Anterior lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion - systematic review and meta-analysis
    Phan, Kevin
    Thayaparan, Ganesha K.
    Mobbs, Ralph J.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2015, 29 (05) : 705 - 711
  • [47] SPONDYLOLISTHESIS TREATED BY POSTEROLATERAL FUSION
    VALLE, O
    BJERKREIM, I
    ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA SCANDINAVICA, 1979, 50 (06): : 804 - 804
  • [48] Comparison of spinous process-splitting laminectomy versus posterolateral fusion for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis
    Kurogochi, Daisuke
    Uehara, Masashi
    Yui, Mutsuki
    Ikegami, Shota
    Oba, Hiroki
    Mimura, Tetsuhiko
    Takizawa, Takashi
    Fukuzawa, Takuma
    Hayashi, Koji
    Kosaku, Hidemi
    Hatakenaka, Terue
    Kamanaka, Takayuki
    Miyaoka, Yoshinori
    Misawa, Hiromichi
    Takahashi, Jun
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2023, 32 (02) : 447 - 454
  • [49] A prospective randomized study of unilateral versus bilateral instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis
    Fernandez-Fairen, Mariano
    Sala, Pedro
    Ramirez, Hernan
    Gil, Javier
    SPINE, 2007, 32 (04) : 395 - 401
  • [50] Instrumented Versus Uninstrumented Posterolateral Fusion for Lumbar
    Andresen, Andreas K.
    Wickstrom, Line A.
    Holm, Randi B.
    Carreon, Leah Y.
    Andersen, Mikkel Osterheden
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2023, 105 (17): : 1309 - 1317