-
Journal of Healthcare Engineering 2022Systematic analysis of the incidence of percutaneous spinal endoscopic technique and traditional open surgery for lumbar disc herniation. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Systematic analysis of the incidence of percutaneous spinal endoscopic technique and traditional open surgery for lumbar disc herniation.
METHODS
A randomized controlled trial (RCT) and cohort study on complications related to traditional open surgery was searched on the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese journal full-text database (CNKI), Wanfang, and Embase database. Language is not limited. The quality of each study was evaluated, various complications were compiled into electronic baseline tables, and the data from these studies were available. Meta-analysis and synthesis were performed with the RevMan 5.3 software to evaluate the statistical significance of both surgical techniques in terms of various complications.
RESULTS
12 studies were eventually included, and a total of 2,797 patients were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis results showed that there was no statistical difference in postoperative paresthesia between percutaneous spinal endoscopy and traditional open surgery (OR = 1.17, 95% CI (0.82, 1.66), = 0.38, = 0%, = 0.88), direct nerve root damage (OR = 0.79, 95% CI (0.58, 1.07), = 0.13, = 73%, = 1.52), and intraoperative hemorrhage and hematoma formation (OR = 1.00, 95% CI (0.67, 1.48), = 0.99, = 0%, = 0.02), but there was a statistical difference in disc recurrence (OR = 2.24, 95% CI (1.56, 3.21), < 0.0001, = 81%, = 4.39).
CONCLUSION
Compared with the traditional open surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation, percutaneous spinal endoscopic technology has obvious advantages in reducing nerve root injury, dural injury, and surgical area wound complications, but it is limited to preventing the technical characteristics of the surgical site, which is worse than that of open surgery.
Topics: Diskectomy, Percutaneous; Endoscopy; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Lumbar Vertebrae; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35340255
DOI: 10.1155/2022/6033989 -
Orthopaedic Surgery Feb 2020Whether cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is superior to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) remains controversial, especially in relation to long-term... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Whether cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is superior to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) remains controversial, especially in relation to long-term results. The present study aimed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficiency of CDA and ACDF for cervical disc disease.
METHODS
We performed this study according to the Cochrane methodology. An extensive search was undertaken in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases up to 1 June 2019 using the following key words: "anterior cervical fusion," "arthroplasty," "replacement" and "artificial disc". RevMan 5.3 (Cochrane, London, UK) was used to analyze data. Safety and efficiency outcome measures included the success rate, functional outcome measures, adverse events (AE), adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), secondary surgery, and patients' satisfaction and recommendation rates. The OR and MD with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate discontinuous and continuous variables, respectively. The statistically significant level was set at P < 0.05.
RESULTS
A total of 11 randomized controlled trials with 3505 patients (CDA/ACDF: 1913/1592) were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with ACDF, CDA achieved significantly higher overall success (2.10, 95% CI [1.70, 2.59]), neck disability index (NDI) success (1.73, 95% CI [1.37, 2.18]), neurological success (1.65, 95% CI [1.24, 2.20]), patients' satisfaction (2.14, 95% CI [1.50, 3.05]), and patients' recommendation rates (3.23, 95% CI [1.79, 5.80]). Functional outcome measures such as visual analog score neck pain (-5.50, 95% CI [-8.49, -2.52]) and arm pain (-3.78, 95% CI [-7.04, -0.53]), the Short Form-36 physical component score (SF-36 PCS) (1.93, 95% CI [0.53, 3.32]), and the Short Form-36 mental component score (SF-36 MCS) (2.62, 95% CI [0.95, 4.29]), revealed superiority in the CDA group. CDA also achieved a significantly lower rate of symptomatic ASD (0.46, 95% CI [0.34, 0.63]), total secondary surgery (0.50, 95% CI [0.29, 0.87]), secondary surgery at the index level (0.46, 95% CI [0.29, 0.74]), and secondary surgery at the adjacent level (0.37, 95% CI [0.28, 0.49]). However, no significant difference was found in radiological success (1.35, 95% CI [0.88, 2.08]), NDI score (-2.88, 95% CI [-5.93, 0.17]), total reported AE (1.14, 95% CI [0.92, 1.42]), serious AE (0.89, 95% CI [0.71, 1.11]), device/surgery-related AE (0.90, 95% CI [0.68, 1.18]), radiological superior ASD (0.63, 95% CI [0.28, 1.43]), inferior ASD (0.45, 95% CI [0.19, 1.11]), and work status (1.33, 95% CI [0.78, 2.25]). Furthermore, subgroup analysis showed different results between US and non-US groups.
CONCLUSION
Our study provided further evidence that compared to ACDF, CDA had a higher long-term clinical success rate and better functional outcome measurements, and resulted in less symptomatic ASD and fewer secondary surgeries. However, worldwide multicenter RCT with long-term follow up are still needed for further evaluation in the future.
Topics: Arthroplasty; Cervical Vertebrae; Disability Evaluation; Diskectomy; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spinal Fusion; Total Disc Replacement
PubMed: 31863642
DOI: 10.1111/os.12585 -
European Spine Journal : Official... Nov 2020To evaluate the efficacy of locking stand-alone cage (LSC) compared with anterior plate construct (APC) in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Locking stand-alone cage versus anterior plate construct in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy of locking stand-alone cage (LSC) compared with anterior plate construct (APC) in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was carried out in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to screen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compared LSC with APC in ACDF. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used for assessment of study quality. Data were analyzed with the Review Manager 5.3 software.
RESULTS
A total of seven RCTs were included. The results revealed no significant differences between LSC and APC in ACDF regarding the fusion rate, Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, visual analogue scale score, neck disability index score, hospital stay, subsidence rate, cervical lordosis, segmental Cobb angle, and disc height. However, LSC was associated with a significantly shorter operation time, less blood loss, lower overall incidence of dysphagia, and lower adjacent-level ossification (ALO) rate compared with APC.
CONCLUSION
In summary, LSC is not only a safe and effective device for ACDF but also has the advantages of significantly reduced operation time, blood loss, overall incidence of dysphagia, and ALO rate over APC. Therefore, LSC is a better alternative than APC for the patients undergoing ACDF procedures.
Topics: Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spinal Fusion; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32770359
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-020-06561-x -
European Spine Journal : Official... Oct 2022Traumatic facet dislocations in the subaxial cervical spine, also known as locked facets, are commonly associated with neurological deficits. The fear of the presence of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Traumatic facet dislocations in the subaxial cervical spine, also known as locked facets, are commonly associated with neurological deficits. The fear of the presence of an associated traumatic disc herniation and consequent neurological worsening usually causes a delay in the spinal realignment. This study's aim is an analysis of safety and efficacy when treating acute cervical traumatic facet dislocations using cranial-cervical traction or posterior open reduction and fixation in the presence of disc herniations.
METHODS
Inclusion criteria addressed the following patient groups: (1) MRI diagnosis of traumatic cervical facet dislocations with disc herniation, (2) intervention: either cranial-cervical traction or posterior open reduction and fixation, (4) neurological outcomes after treatment, (5) adult 18 plus years of age, (6) sample sizes greater than 20 patients, (7) English language publication. The following databases and search tools were analyzed: MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Google Scholar, and the clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov), October 2021.
RESULTS
Six studies were found, 2 with posterior open reduction and fixation and 4 with cranial-cervical traction, totalizing 197 patients. Neurological worsening was reported only in 1 case (0.5%).
CONCLUSIONS
Traumatic disc herniation in cervical facet dislocations is not an absolute contraindication of cranial-cervical traction or posterior open reduction. Early realignment of the spine could bring more neurological benefits than waiting for an MRI or surgical discectomy. However, caution is needed in this review's data interpretation until prospective and well-designed studies are performed.
Topics: Adult; Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Joint Dislocations; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 35763222
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-022-07290-z -
Neurosurgical Review Dec 2021Hirayama disease (HD) is a relatively uncommon cause of lower cervical myelopathy. A number of surgical approaches have been described in patients with HD in literature.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Hirayama disease (HD) is a relatively uncommon cause of lower cervical myelopathy. A number of surgical approaches have been described in patients with HD in literature. We reviewed the literature and did a systematic review and meta-analysis of the studies which presented the clinical outcome following surgical intervention in HD. A systematic search of literature was performed with the keywords "Surgical treatment in Hirayama Disease", "Surgical approach in Hirayama Disease" and "Hirayama disease surgery". Data related to clinical outcome following surgery was pooled to calculate the pooled proportion of clinical improvement following anterior and posterior surgical approach. Thirty-four articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final review. Altogether, there were 10 types of surgical procedures performed for Hirayama disease. The most commonly described surgical technique was anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with cervical plating. The pooled proportion of patients experiencing clinical improvement following all cervical approaches was 80% (95% confidence interval 76 to 84%). Pooled proportion was maximum for anterior cervical plating (96% (95% confidence interval 62 to 100%)) and minimum for ACDF without plating (57% (95% confidence interval 20 to 88%)). Subgroup analysis based on different surgical approaches was not significant (p value = 0.61). The pooled proportion of patients experiencing clinical improvement following anterior and posterior cervical approach was 80% (95% confidence interval 76 to 84%) and 81% (95% confidence interval 66 to 91%). The indications of surgical treatment in patients with HD include poor patient compliance for neck collar or rapidly progressing severe disease. Good results with more than 80% chances of clinical improvement have been reported following various anterior and posterior surgical approaches. However, there was no significant difference in the pooled outcome of different surgical approaches. Most common technique used in literature is anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with plating.
Topics: Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Spinal Cord Diseases; Spinal Fusion; Spinal Muscular Atrophies of Childhood; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33884522
DOI: 10.1007/s10143-021-01540-2 -
Pain Physician Jul 2021New approaches and technologies can be beneficial for patients but also bring corresponding complications. Traditional pairwise meta-analyses cannot be used to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
New approaches and technologies can be beneficial for patients but also bring corresponding complications. Traditional pairwise meta-analyses cannot be used to comprehensively rank all surgical approaches.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the outcomes of different surgical approaches for lumbar disc herniation (LDH).
STUDY DESIGN
NMA of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for multiple treatment comparisons of LDH.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Ovid, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for RCTs comparing different surgical approaches for patients with LDH from inception to February 10, 2020. The Markov chain Monte Carlo methods were used to perform a hierarchical Bayesian NMA in WinBUGS version 1.4.3 using a random effects consistency model. The primary outcomes were disability and pain intensity. The secondary outcomes were complications and reoperation. The PROSPERO number was CRD42020179406.
RESULTS
A total of 22 trials including 2529 patients and all 5 different approaches (open discectomy or microdiscectomy [OD/MD], microendoscopic discectomy [MED], percutaneous endoscopic discectomy [PED], percutaneous discectomy [PD], and tubular discectomy [TD]) were retrospectively retrieved. PED had the best efficacy in improving patients' dysfunction with no statistical significance (probability = 50%). PD was significantly worse than OD/MD, MED, and PED in relieving patients' pain (standardized mean differences: 0.87 [0.03, 1.76], 0.94 [0.06, 1.88], and 1.02 [0.13, 1.94], respectively). There was no statistically significant difference between any 2 surgical approaches in dural tear; intraoperative, postoperative, and overall complications; or reoperation rate. PED had the lowest dural tear rate and the lowest intraoperative and overall complication rates (probability = 51%, 67%, and 33%, respectively). TD had the lowest postoperative complication and reoperation rates (probability = 35% and 39%, respectively).
LIMITATIONS
The limitations of this NMA include the inconsistent follow-up times, the criteria for complications, and the reasons for reoperation.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with other approaches used to treat LDH, PED had the best safety and efficacy in general, and TD had the lowest reoperation rate. Finally, we recommended PED for LDH.
Topics: Diskectomy, Percutaneous; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Lumbar Vertebrae; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 34213864
DOI: No ID Found -
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma... Sep 2023Lumbar disc herniation in obese individuals poses unique surgical challenges which can influence outcomes in such patients. Limited studies are available evaluating the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Lumbar disc herniation in obese individuals poses unique surgical challenges which can influence outcomes in such patients. Limited studies are available evaluating the results of discectomy in obese persons. The aim of this review was to compare outcomes in obese and non-obese individuals; and to analyse whether approach to surgery had a bearing on these outcomes.
METHODS
The literature search was conducted on four databases (PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL) and PRISMA guidelines were followed. After screening by the authors, eight studies were shortlisted from which data were extracted and analysed. Comparative analysis was done for lumbar discectomy (microdiscectomy or minimally invasive vs. endoscopic technique) between obese and non-obese groups from the six comparative studies in our review. Pooled estimates and subgroup analysis was done to ascertain the effect of surgical approach on outcomes.
RESULTS
Eight studies published between 2007 and 2021 were included. Mean age of study cohort was 39.05 years. Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the non-obese group mean difference of 15.1 min (95% CI - 0.24 to 30.5). On subgroup analysis, obese individuals operated via endoscopic approach had significantly decreased operative time as compared to open approach. Blood loss and complication rates were also lower in the non-obese groups, but not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
Significantly less mean operative time was seen in non-obese individuals and when obese patients were operated via endoscopic approach. This difference between obese and non-obese groups was significantly more in the open subgroup as compared to the endoscopic subgroup. No significant differences in blood loss, mean improvement in VAS score, recurrence rate, complication rate and length of hospital stay was found between obese and non-obese patients as well as between endoscopic versus open lumbar discectomy within the obese subgroup. The learning curve associated with endoscopy makes it a challenging procedure.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Lumbar Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Endoscopy; Length of Stay; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37041263
DOI: 10.1007/s00402-023-04870-6 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Mar 2024The clinical outcomes of patients who received a cervical collar after anterior cervical decompression and fusion were evaluated by comparison with those of patients who... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The clinical outcomes of patients who received a cervical collar after anterior cervical decompression and fusion were evaluated by comparison with those of patients who did not receive a cervical collar.
METHODS
All of the comparative studies published in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases as of 1 October 2023 were included. All outcomes were analysed using Review Manager 5.4.
RESULTS
Four studies with a total of 406 patients were included, and three of the studies were randomized controlled trials. Meta-analysis of the short-form 36 results revealed that wearing a cervical collar after anterior cervical decompression and fusion was more beneficial (P < 0.05). However, it is important to note that when considering the Neck Disability Index at the final follow-up visit, not wearing a cervical collar was found to be more advantageous. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative cervical range of motion, fusion rate, or neck disability index at 6 weeks postoperatively (all P > 0.05) between the cervical collar group and the no cervical collar group.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed no significant differences in the 6-week postoperative cervical range of motion, fusion rate, or neck disability index between the cervical collar group and the no cervical collar group. However, compared to patients who did not wear a cervical collar, patients who did wear a cervical collar had better scores on the short form 36. Interestingly, at the final follow-up visit, the neck disability index scores were better in the no cervical collar group than in the cervical collar group. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023466583.
Topics: Humans; Cervical Vertebrae; Decompression, Surgical; Diskectomy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spinal Diseases; Spinal Fusion; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38454504
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-04661-8 -
Acta Neurochirurgica Feb 2020Multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD) can be treated surgically with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA), or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The safety and efficacy of hybrid surgery for multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion or cervical disc arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD) can be treated surgically with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA), or a hybrid surgery (HS) of the two in which both procedures are used at different vertebral levels. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to compare the clinical and radiographical outcomes of HS against ACDF or CDA alone.
METHODS
Three electronic databases were searched for articles published before December 2018. The literature was searched and assessed by independent reviewers according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement.
RESULTS
Eight papers were identified as eligible with a total of 424 patients. Post-operative C2-C7 range of motion (ROM) was significantly greater after HS than ACDF (p = 0.004; mean difference (MD) 6.14°). The ROM of the superior adjacent segment was significantly lower after HS than ACDF (p < 0.0001; MD - 2.87°) as was the ROM of the inferior adjacent segment (p = 0.0005; MD - 3.11°). HS patients' return to work was shorter than those who underwent ACDF (p < 0.00001; MD - 32.01 days) and CDA (p < 0.00001; MD - 32.92 days). There were no statistically significant differences in functional outcomes following CDA compared with HS. There was no significant difference in operation time, intra-operative blood loss, or post-operative complications between any of the procedures.
CONCLUSION
The number of included studies was small, the heterogeneity between them was substantial, and the quality of evidence was very low. Large randomised controlled trials are required to provide strong evidence that would enable recommendation of one intervention over another.
Topics: Arthroplasty; Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Intervertebral Disc; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration; Postoperative Complications; Spinal Fusion
PubMed: 31848789
DOI: 10.1007/s00701-019-04129-3 -
Yonsei Medical Journal Sep 2022With an increasing number of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) being conducted for degenerative cervical disc disease, there is a rising interest in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
With an increasing number of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) being conducted for degenerative cervical disc disease, there is a rising interest in the related quality of management and healthcare costs. Unplanned readmission after ACDF affects both the quality of management and medical expenses. This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the risk factors of unplanned readmission after ACDF to improve the quality of management and prevent increase in healthcare costs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched the databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify eligible studies using the searching terms, "readmission" and "ACDF." A total of 10 studies were included.
RESULTS
Among the demographic risk factors, older age [weighted mean difference (WMD), 3.93; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.30-5.56; <0.001], male [odds ratio (OR), 1.23; 95% CI, 1.10-1.36; <0.001], and private insurance (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.17-0.69; <0.001) were significantly associated with unplanned readmission. Among patient characteristics, hypertension (HTN) (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.41-3.25; <0.001), diabetes mellitus (DM) (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.20-2.11; =0.001), coronary artery disease (CAD) (OR, 2.87; 95% CI, 2.13-3.86; <0.001), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status grade >2 (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.68-2.72; <0.001), and anxiety and depression (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.29-1.51; <0.001) were significantly associated with unplanned readmission. Among the perioperative factors, pulmonary complications (OR, 22.52; 95% CI, 7.21-70.41; <0.001) was significantly associated with unplanned readmission.
CONCLUSION
Male, older age, HTN, DM, CAD, ASA grade >2, anxiety and depression, pulmonary complications were significantly associated with an increased occurrence of unplanned readmission after ACDF.
Topics: Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Male; Patient Readmission; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors; Spinal Fusion
PubMed: 36031784
DOI: 10.3349/ymj.2022.63.9.842