-
Spine Mar 2017Systematic review and meta-analysis. (Review)
Review
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
The goal of this study was to (i) assess the risk of neurological injury after anterior cervical spine surgery (ACSS) with and without intraoperative neuromonitoring (ION) and (ii) evaluate differences in the sensitivity and specificity of ION for ACSS.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
Although ION is used to detect impending neurological injuries in deformity surgery, it's utility in ACSS remains controversial.
METHODS
A systematic search of multiple medical reference databases was conducted for studies on ION use for ACSS. Studies that included posterior cervical surgery were excluded. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model for heterogeneity. Outcome measure was postoperative neurological injury.
RESULTS
The search yielded 10 studies totaling 26,357 patients. The weighted risk of neurological injury after ACSS was 0.64% (0.23-1.25). The weighted risk of neurological injury was 0.20% (0.05-0.47) for ACDFs compared with 1.02% (0.10-2.88) for corpectomies. For ACDFs, there was no difference in the risk of neurological injury with or without ION (odds ratio, 0.726; confidence interval, CI, 0.287-1.833; P = 0.498). The pooled sensitivities and specificities of ION for ACSS are 71% (CI: 48%-87%) and 98% (CI: 92%-100%), respectively. Unimodal ION has a higher specificity than multimodal ION [unimodal: 99% (CI: 97%-100%), multimodal: 92% (CI: 81%-96%), P = 0.0218]. There was no statistically significant difference in sensitivities between unimodal and multimodal [68% vs. 88%, respectively, P = 0.949].
CONCLUSION
The risk of neurological injury after ACSS is low although procedures involving a corpectomy may carry a higher risk. For ACDFs, there is no difference in the risk of neurological injury with or without ION use. Unimodal ION has a higher specificity than multimodal ION and may minimize "subclinical" intraoperative alerts in ACSS.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
3.
Topics: Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Monitoring, Intraoperative; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Spinal Fusion
PubMed: 27390917
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001767 -
Journal of Orthopaedics Dec 2017Pes planovalgus is the commonest foot deformity in children and presents with wide range of severity and symptoms. Surgery is mostly indicated for significant... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
Pes planovalgus is the commonest foot deformity in children and presents with wide range of severity and symptoms. Surgery is mostly indicated for significant malalignment, resistant to non-surgical management. Lateral column lengthening is considered an appealing option as does not involve arthrodesis and allows for further growth and foot development.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review on lateral column lengthening for pes planovalgus deformity in line with PRISMA-P Checklist. We carried out detailed literature search on PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, CINAHL, Google Scholar and Bibliographies. We analysed selected studies for patient demographics, radiological, clinical outcome and complications.
RESULTS
We identified seven studies with 103 patients involving 156 feet. The mean age was 13.3 years (Range 5.7-42) and mean follow up was 70.2 Months (Range 24.9-156). There was statistical significant improvement in Calcaneal pitch, Lateral Talo-metatarsal and AP Talo-navicular angles (p-value 0.001). The mean preoperative AOFAS Score (71 Feet) was 58.85 (Range 34-78) and mean postoperative AOFAS Score (91 Feet) was 92.25 (Range 73-100). Two studies (32 Feet) used author specified criteria has reported Good/Excellent result in 72% (23/32 feet) and Fair/Poor result in 18% (9/32) feet. Complications were reported in 17.5% (18/103) included nerve related, pseudo arthrosis, non-union and metal related complications.
CONCLUSION
Surgical intervention with lateral column lengthening has good radiological and clinical outcome with high patient satisfaction and acceptable complications. The literature is mostly retrospective and there is need for prospective, multi-centre studies using patient centred validated outcome measure.
PubMed: 28883689
DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2017.07.013 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Jul 2020Systematic review and meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
AIM
The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and accuracy of the C2 pedicle versus C2 pars screws placement and free-hand technique versus navigation for upper cervical fusion patients.
METHODS
Databases searched included PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify all papers published up to April 2020 that have evaluated C2 pedicle/pars screws placement accuracy. Two authors individually screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The accuracy rates associated with C2 pedicle/pars were extracted. The pooled accuracy rate estimated was performed by the CMA software. A funnel plot based on accuracy rate estimate was used to evaluate publication bias.
RESULTS
From 1123 potentially relevant studies, 142 full-text publications were screened. We analyzed data from 79 studies involving 4431 patients with 6026 C2 pedicle or pars screw placement. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) to evaluate the quality of studies included in this review. Overall, funnel plot and Begg's test did not indicate obvious publication bias. The pooled analysis reveals that the accuracy rates were 93.8% for C2 pedicle screw free-hand, 93.7% for pars screw free-hand, 92.2% for navigated C2 pedicle screw, and 86.2% for navigated C2 pars screw (all, P value < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were observed between the accuracy of placement C2 pedicle versus C2 pars screws with the free-hand technique and the free-hand C2 pedicle group versus the navigated C2 pedicle group (all, P value > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Overall, there was no difference in the safety and accuracy between the free-hand and navigated techniques. Further well-conducted studies with detailed stratification are needed to complement our findings.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cervical Vertebrae; Child; Child, Preschool; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pedicle Screws; Quality Assurance, Health Care; Safety; Spinal Fusion; Surgery, Computer-Assisted; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Young Adult
PubMed: 32690035
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-020-01798-0 -
EFORT Open Reviews Apr 2023The biomechanical characteristics of different techniques to perform the modified Lapidus procedure are controversial, discussing the issue of stability, rigidity, and... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The biomechanical characteristics of different techniques to perform the modified Lapidus procedure are controversial, discussing the issue of stability, rigidity, and compression forces from a biomechanical point of view. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the available options to identify whether there is a procedure providing superior biomechanical results.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed by screening PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases until September 2021. There was a wide heterogeneity of the available data in the different studies. Load to failure, stiffness, and compression forces were summarized and evaluated.
RESULTS
Seventeen biomechanical studies were retrieved - ten cadaveric and seven polyurethane foam (artificial bone) studies. Fixation methods ranged from the classic crossed screw approach (n = 5) to plates (dorsomedial and plantar) with or without compression screws (n = 11). Newer implants such as intramedullary stabilization screws (n = 1) and memory alloy staples (n = 2) were investigated.
CONCLUSION
The two crossed screws construct is still a biomechanical option; however, according to this systematic review, there is strong evidence that a plate-screw construct provides superior stability especially in combination with a compression screw. There is also evidence about plate position and low evidence about compression screw position. Plantar plates seem to be advantageous from a biomechanical point of view, whereas compression screws could be better when positioned outside the plate. Overall, this review suggests the biomechanical advantages of using a combination of locking plates with a compression screw.
PubMed: 37097047
DOI: 10.1530/EOR-22-0069 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Aug 2021Controversy remains about the choice of reduction or arthrodesis in situ for surgical management of adolescent spondylolisthesis, while no systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Controversy remains about the choice of reduction or arthrodesis in situ for surgical management of adolescent spondylolisthesis, while no systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to determine which one is the optimal surgical choice. The study aims to compare outcomes of the two surgical strategies for adolescent spondylolisthesis.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was performed through PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, OVID/MEDLINE, CBM, CNKI, and Wanfang with a cutoff date of May 21st, 2021. Search terms included "spondylolisthesis", "in situ" and "reduction". Included studies had following characteristics: (I) participants: adolescents with spondylolisthesis. (II) Intervention: reduction following arthrodesis. (III) Control: arthrodesis in situ. (IV) Outcomes: postoperative clinical and/or radiographic results. (V) Study design: randomized controlled trial (RCT), cohort or case-control study. Data were analyzed with Review Manager 5.4, and risk of bias assessment of studies was assessed via Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS).
RESULTS
Six cohort studies were included, with NOS scores of all ≥6. There were no significant differences regarding operative time [mean difference (MD) =152.62; 95% [confidence interval (CI)]: -54.02 to 359.26; I2=96%; P=0.15], blood loss (MD =786.61; 95% CI: -646.82 to 2,220.04; I2=90%; P=0.28), patient satisfaction (MD =1.98; 95% CI: 0.72 to 5.43; I2=0%; P=0.18), neurological complications (MD =1.02; 95% CI: 0.25 to 4.18; I2=0%; P=0.98), or total complications (MD =0.59; 95% CI: 0.29 to 1.19; I2=0%; P=0.14). However, patients undergoing reduction achieved better radiographic results: fusion rate (MD =3.09; 95% CI: 1.22 to 7.84; I2=40%; P=0.02), postoperative pseudarthrosis (MD =0.35; 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.79; I2=24%; P=0.01), percentage of slippage (MD =-20.58; 95% CI: -26.32 to -14.84; I2=0%; P<0.00001), and slipping angle (MD =-10.05; 95% CI: -14.55 to -5.54; I2=0%; P<0.0001). And no overt publication bias was found in the studies.
DISCUSSION
Both reduction and arthrodesis in situ in adolescent spondylolisthesis are safe and demonstrate good clinical outcomes. However, reduction showed better radiographic results and was associated with less pseudarthrosis, better relief of disability, and improvements in self-image. In conclusion, reduction may be the optimal choice compared with arthrodesis in situ, but further verification of these findings is recommended using RCTs.
Topics: Adolescent; Case-Control Studies; Humans; Spinal Fusion; Spondylolisthesis
PubMed: 34328015
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-569 -
The Surgeon : Journal of the Royal... Feb 2023The optimum surgical intervention for elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and low-grade degenerative-spondylolisthesis (LGDS) has been extensively... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The optimum surgical intervention for elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and low-grade degenerative-spondylolisthesis (LGDS) has been extensively debated. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised-controlled-trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of decompression-alone against the gold-standard approach of decompression-with-fusion (D + F) in elderly patients with LSS and LGDS.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed on published databases from inception to October-2021. English-language RCTs of elderly patients (mean age over-65) with LSS and LGDS, who had undergone DA or D + F were included. The quality and weight of evidence was assessed, and a meta-analysis performed.
RESULTS
Six RCTs (n = 531; mean age: 66.2 years; 57.8% female) were included. There was no difference in visual-analogue-scale (VAS) scores of back-pain (BP) or leg-pain (LP) at mean follow-up of 27.4 months between both DA and D + F groups (BP: mean-difference (MD)0.24, 95%CI: -0.38-0.85; LP MD:0.39, 95%CI: -0.34-1.11). No difference in disability, measured by Oswestry-Disability-Index scores, was found between both groups (MD:0.50, 95%CI: -3.31-4.31). However, patients in DA group had less hospital complications and fewer adverse events (total-surgical-complications OR:0.57, 95%CI: 0.36-0.90), despite a higher rate of worsening DS (OR:3.49, 95%CI: 1.05-11.65). No difference in BP or LP was found in subgroup-analysis of open-laminectomy compared to posterolateral-fusion (PLF) (BP: MD: -0.24, 95%CI: -1.80-1.32; LP MD:0.80, 95%CI: -0.95-2.55).
CONCLUSIONS
DA is not inferior to D + F in elderly patients with LSS and LGDS. DA carries a lower risk of hospital complications and fewer adverse events, however, surgeons should weigh these findings with the increased risk of DS progressing post-operatively.
Topics: Female; Humans; Aged; Male; Constriction, Pathologic; Decompression, Surgical; Spondylolisthesis; Lumbar Vertebrae; Spinal Stenosis; Pain; Spinal Fusion; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35305933
DOI: 10.1016/j.surge.2022.02.008 -
Medicine Nov 2015The aim of this study is to determine whether surgery offers protection against early subtalar arthrodesis in displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures. Systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this study is to determine whether surgery offers protection against early subtalar arthrodesis in displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures. Systematic review and meta-analysis: searches of electronic databases 1980 to August 2014, checking of reference lists, hand searching of journals, and contact with experts. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which surgical treatment was compared with nonsurgical treatment of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures from 1980 to 2014. The modified Jadad scale was used for trial quality and effective data were pooled for meta-analysis. Study results related to early subtalar arthrodesis were extracted and risk assessment was combined with surgical treatment and nonsurgical treatment. The primary analysis included 4 studies and 966 participants. The estimated overall risk ratio was 4.40 (95% confidence interval 2.67-7.39), indicating the incidence of early subtalar arthrodesis in nonsurgical group is 4.4 times the surgical group. The results showed that surgical treatment was superior to nonsurgical treatment in protection against early subtalar arthrodesis in displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures (Z = 5.600, P < 0.001).Surgery offers protection against early subtalar arthrodesis in displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures.
Topics: Arthrodesis; Calcaneus; Foot Injuries; Humans; Intra-Articular Fractures; Subtalar Joint
PubMed: 26559281
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001984 -
Cureus Nov 2022Calcaneonavicular coalitions in adults can be managed conservatively or through operative means involving resection or arthrodesis of the joints. The aim of this... (Review)
Review
Calcaneonavicular coalitions in adults can be managed conservatively or through operative means involving resection or arthrodesis of the joints. The aim of this systematic review was to compare complication rates and functional outcomes for the different interventions. PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies that reported outcomes for the management of calcaneonavicular coalitions in adults. Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 118 coalitions. Forty-one coalitions were managed conservatively and 71 through operative means of which, 62 included a resection and nine had an arthrodesis performed. Patients who were operated upon had a significantly higher complication rate of 23.4% compared to 10.6% for those who were managed conservatively (p=0.048). There was no significant difference in complication rates among those who had a resection or an arthrodesis. All studies demonstrated an improvement in functional outcomes regardless of intervention used. Conservative management of calcaneonavicular coalitions in adults should continue to be advocated as first-line treatment given the lower complication rates compared to operative means.
PubMed: 36382326
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.31253 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2017Surgery is used to treat persistent pain and dysfunction at the base of the thumb when conservative management, such as splinting, or medical management, such as oral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Surgery is used to treat persistent pain and dysfunction at the base of the thumb when conservative management, such as splinting, or medical management, such as oral analgesics, is no longer adequate in reducing disability and pain. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of different surgical techniques for trapeziometacarpal (thumb) osteoarthritis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following sources up to 08 August 2013: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1950 to August 2013), EMBASE (1974 to August 2013), CINAHL (1982 to August 2013), Clinicaltrials.gov (to August 2013) and World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Trials Portal (to August 2013).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs where the intervention was surgery for people with thumb osteoarthritis. Outcomes were pain, physical function, quality of life, patient global assessment, adverse events, treatment failure or trapeziometacarpal joint imaging.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. Two review authors independently screened and included studies according to the inclusion criteria, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data, including adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 studies with 670 participants. Seven surgical procedures were identified (trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI), trapeziectomy, trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction, trapeziectomy with interpositional arthroplasty (IA), Artelon joint resurfacing, arthrodesis and Swanson joint replacement). We did not find any studies that compared surgery with sham surgery or surgery with non-surgical interventions.Most included studies had an unclear risk of most biases which raises doubt about the results. No procedure demonstrated any superiority over another in terms of pain, physical function, quality of life, patient global assessment, adverse events, treatment failure (re-operation) or trapeziometacarpal joint imaging. One study demonstrated a difference in adverse events (mild-moderate swelling) between Artelon joint replacement and trapeziectomy with tendon interposition. However, the quality of evidence was very low due to a high risk of bias and imprecision of results.Low quality evidence suggests trapeziectomy with LRTI may not provide additional benefits or result in more adverse events over trapeziectomy alone. Mean pain (three studies, 162 participants) was 26 mm on a 0 to 100 mm VAS (0 is no pain) for trapeziectomy alone, trapeziectomy with LRTI reduced pain by a mean of 2.8 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.8 to 4.2) or an absolute reduction of 3% (-10% to 4%). Mean physical function (three studies, 211 participants) was 31.1 points on a 0 to 100 point scale (0 is best physical function, or no disability) with trapeziectomy alone, trapeziectomy with LRTI resulted in sightly lower function scores (standardised mean difference 0.1, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.32), an equivalent to a worsening of 0.2 points (95% CI -5.8 to 6.1) on a 0 to 100 point scale (absolute decrease in function 0.03% (-0.83% to 0.88%)). Low quality evidence from four studies (328 participants) indicates that the mean number of adverse events was 10 per 100 participants for trapeziectomy alone, and 19 events per 100 participants for trapeziectomy with LRTI (RR 1.89, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.73) or an absolute risk increase of 9% (95% CI 0% to 28%). Low quality evidence from one study (42 participants) indicates that the mean scapho-metacarpal distance was 2.3 mm for the trapeziectomy alone group, trapeziectomy with LRTI resulted in a mean of 0.1 mm less distance (95% CI -0.81 to 0.61). None of the included trials reported global assessment, quality of life, and revision or re-operation rates.Low-quality evidence from two small studies (51 participants) indicated that trapeziectomy with LRTI may not improve function or slow joint degeneration, or produce additional adverse events over trapeziectomy and ligament reconstruction.We are uncertain of the benefits or harms of other surgical techniques due to the mostly low quality evidence from single studies and the low reporting rates of key outcomes. There was insufficient evidence to assess if trapeziectomy with LRTI had additional benefit over arthrodesis or trapeziectomy with IA. There was also insufficient evidence to assess if trapeziectomy with IA had any additional benefit over the Artelon joint implant, the Swanson joint replacement or trapeziectomy alone.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not identify any studies that compared surgery to sham surgery or to non-operative treatments. We were unable to demonstrate that any technique confers a benefit over another technique in terms of pain and physical function. Furthermore, the included studies were not of high enough quality to provide conclusive evidence that the compared techniques provided equivalent outcomes.
Topics: Hand Joints; Humans; Metacarpus; Osteoarthritis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Range of Motion, Articular; Recovery of Function; Thumb; Trapezium Bone
PubMed: 28368089
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004631.pub5 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Feb 2022No available meta-analysis has been published that systematically assessed spinal fixation mechanical failure after tumor resection based on largely pooled data. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
No available meta-analysis has been published that systematically assessed spinal fixation mechanical failure after tumor resection based on largely pooled data. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the spinal fixation failure rate and potential risk factors for hardware failure.
METHODS
Electronic articles published between January 1, 1979, and January 30, 2021, were searched and critically evaluated. The authors independently reviewed the abstracts and extracted data on the spinal fixation failure rate and potential risk factors.
RESULTS
Thirty-eight studies were finally included in the meta-analysis. The pooled spinal fixation mechanical failure rate was 10%. The significant risk factors for hardware failure included tumor level and cage subsidence. Radiotherapy was a potential risk factor.
CONCLUSION
The spinal fixation mechanical failure rate was 10%. Spinal fixation failure is mainly associated with tumor level, cage subsidence and radiotherapy. Durable reconstruction is needed for patients with these risk factors.
Topics: Humans; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Spinal Fusion; Spinal Neoplasms; Spine
PubMed: 35184737
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-03007-6