-
Global Spine Journal Oct 2018Systematic review. (Review)
Review
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review.
OBJECTIVES
Diagnosis of pseudarthrosis after anterior cervical fusion is difficult, and often depends on the surgeon's subjective assessment because recommended radiographic criteria are lacking. This review evaluated the available evidence for confirming fusion after anterior cervical surgery.
METHODS
Articles describing assessment of anterior cervical fusion were retrieved from MEDLINE and SCOPUS. The assessment methods and fusion rates at 1 and 2 years were evaluated to identify reliable radiographical criteria.
RESULTS
Ten fusion criteria were described. The 4 most common were presence of bridging trabecular bone between the endplates, absence of a radiolucent gap between the graft and endplate, absence of or minimal motion between adjacent vertebral bodies on flexion-extension radiographs, and absence of or minimal motion between the spinous processes on flexion-extension radiographs. The mean fusion rates were 90.2% at 1 year and 94.7% at 2 years. The fusion rate at 2 years had significant independence ( = .048).
CONCLUSIONS
The most common fusion criteria, bridging trabecular bone between the endplates and absence of a radiolucent gap between the graft and endplate, are subjective. We recommend using <1 mm of motion between spinous processes on extension and flexion to confirm fusion.
PubMed: 30443486
DOI: 10.1177/2192568218755141 -
The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery :... 2022The optimal treatment strategy of Lisfranc injury is still in debate. This study aimed to compare the functional outcome and complications of dorsal bridge plating (BP)...
The optimal treatment strategy of Lisfranc injury is still in debate. This study aimed to compare the functional outcome and complications of dorsal bridge plating (BP) and transarticular screws (TAS). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the present literature was performed. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched using set search criteria and date range January 2000 to July 26, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational comparative studies concerning the outcome of dorsal BP and TAS for the fixation of Lisfranc injuries were eligible for inclusion. Random effect models were used to analyze pooled data. Forest plots using 95% confidence intervals (CI) were created to illustrate mean differences and odds ratios. Four observational studies were eligible for inclusion, including 111 patients in the BP group and 87 patients in the TAS group. American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score was significantly higher in the BP group (mean difference 7.08, 95% CI 1.50-12.66, p = .01). Osteoarthritis was significantly less common in the BP group compared to the TAS group (odds ratio 0.45, 95% CI 0.22-0.94, p = .03). No significant difference was found between the groups in terms of postoperative infection, hardware removal, chronic pain, and secondary arthrodesis. Dorsal bridge plating of fractures in the Lisfranc joint may lead to better functional outcome and a lower incidence of post-traumatic arthritis when compared to transarticular screws. A larger body of high-quality evidence is required to independently analyze the severity of fractures in the different columns involved and subsequent outcomes of operative management.
PubMed: 35459613
DOI: 10.1053/j.jfas.2022.03.002 -
Journal of ISAKOS : Joint Disorders &... Dec 2023Lisfranc injuries remain a significant, but often misdiagnosed, orthopaedic injury. Alongside the traditional methods of surgical fixation, including arthrodesis and... (Review)
Review
IMPORTANCE
Lisfranc injuries remain a significant, but often misdiagnosed, orthopaedic injury. Alongside the traditional methods of surgical fixation, including arthrodesis and open reduction and internal fixation with screws, suture button fixation is an emerging technique.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of suture button fixation for treatment of Lisfranc injuries through a systematic review.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A comprehensive literature review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases for original, English-language studies observing outcomes of Lisfranc injury until August 19, 2022. The clinical studies with evidence level I-IV and at least a 12 month follow-up after the index surgery were included if they examined quantifiable outcomes of Lisfranc injury treated with suture button. Articles were excluded if they included case reports, systematic reviews, comments, editorials, surveys, animal studies, or biomechanical/cadaveric studies. Variables extracted from text and figures include demographic information, return to sport measures, patient reported outcomes, and complications.
FINDINGS
Of the 10 studies included, there were 186 total patients with an age range of 13-72. In every study, all patients were able to return to sport or activity with a return time averaging from 10.8 to 25.9 weeks. Postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society scores ranged from 83.5 to 97.0 while pain Visual Analogue Scale ranged from 0.6 to 2.5. Complications were reported in four studies at a rate of 7.7% including two cases of diastasis, two cases of paraesthesia, one case of button irritation, and one of postoperative degenerative joint disease, with no reported revisions.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In our systematic review, suture button fixation shows high levels of patient reported outcomes, return to sport, and stable fixation in isolated Lisfranc injuries. This surgical technique provides a physiologic reduction across the Lisfranc joint and reduces the need for reoperation including removal of hardware. However, further evidence such as large sample size high-quality randomized controlled trials is needed to draw a definitive conclusion regarding the best treatment for Lisfranc injuries.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level IV, Systematic Review of Level III and IV studies.
Topics: Humans; Return to Sport; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Fractures, Bone; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Sutures
PubMed: 37611870
DOI: 10.1016/j.jisako.2023.08.004 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Sep 2023The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the short-term clinical efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Short-term clinical efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the short-term clinical efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases by meta-analysis.
METHODS
A computer-based search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, and Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP) was conducted from the inception of the each database to April 2023. The searched literature was then screened according to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The critical data were extracted and analyzed using Review Manager software5.4.1. Pooled effects were calculated on the basis of data attributes by mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of the studies.
RESULTS
A total of 13 studies and 949 patients met the inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis, 445 in the UBE-LIF group and 504 in the MIS-TLIF group. UBE-TLIF was superior to MIS-TLIF in terms of intraoperative blood flow, postoperative drainage flow, duration of hospital stay, VAS score for low back pain and ODI score, but the operative time was longer than MIS-TLIF group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of total complication rate, modified Macnab grading criteria, fusion rate, VAS score of leg pain, lumbar lordosis, intervertebral disk height.
CONCLUSION
Both UBE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF are effective surgical modalities for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine diseases. They have similar treatment outcomes, but UBE-TLIF has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and faster recovery.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This study has been registered at INPLASY.COM (No. INPLASY202320087).
Topics: Animals; Humans; Endoscopy; Lumbar Vertebrae; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Spinal Fusion; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37667363
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04138-0 -
Pain and Therapy Dec 2021Spinal endoscopic techniques have recently been applied to complex degenerative conditions or failed back surgery syndrome. We performed a systematic review and...
INTRODUCTION
Spinal endoscopic techniques have recently been applied to complex degenerative conditions or failed back surgery syndrome. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess transforaminal endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (TELF) outcomes and adverse event rates. We also analyzed the effectiveness of the technique for chronic pain after arthrodesis or previous spinal surgery.
METHODS
Multiple databases were searched for studies published in the English language, involving patients > 18 years old who underwent endoscopic foraminotomy. Outcomes included the rate of patients who showed "excellent" and "good" postoperative improvement, decreased leg pain, and improved Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Adverse events considered in the analysis included nerve root damage and intraoperative dural tear, the proportion of patients requiring revision surgery or recurrences, and infections.
RESULTS
A total of 14 studies, encompassing 600 patients, were identified. Approximately 85% of patients improved significantly after TELF, without significant differences among different groups (85% vs. 78%, respectively). Mean leg pain decreased an average of 5.2 points, and ODI scores improved by 41.2%. Patients with previous spine surgery or failed back surgery syndrome had higher postoperative leg dysesthesia rates after TELF (14% vs. 1%, respectively).
CONCLUSION
TELF is a useful and safe method to achieve decompression in foraminal stenosis. This technique is indicated in the elderly or patients with comorbidities. Preoperative planning is paramount in determining the foraminal size and endoscope trajectory. A diamond burr is recommended because it has an advantage over the regular endoscopic shaver in bleeding control and complication avoidance.
PubMed: 34490586
DOI: 10.1007/s40122-021-00309-1 -
Comparative outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for posterior lumbar fusion: a systematic review.Clinical Orthopaedics and Related... Jun 2014Although minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches to the lumbar spine for posterior fusion are increasingly being utilized, the comparative outcomes of MIS and open... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Although minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches to the lumbar spine for posterior fusion are increasingly being utilized, the comparative outcomes of MIS and open posterior lumbar fusion remain unclear.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
In this systematic review, we compared MIS and open transforaminal or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF/PLIF), specifically with respect to (1) surgical end points (including blood loss, surgical time, and fluoroscopy time), (2) clinical outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] and VAS pain scores), and (3) adverse events.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE(®), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Reference lists were manually searched. We included studies with 10 or more patients undergoing MIS compared to open TLIF/PLIF for degenerative lumbar disorders and reporting on surgical end points, clinical outcomes, or adverse events. Twenty-six studies of low- or very low-quality (GRADE protocol) met our inclusion criteria. No significant differences in patient demographics were identified between the cohorts (MIS: n = 856; open: n = 806).
RESULTS
Equivalent operative times were observed between the cohorts, although patients undergoing MIS fusion tended to lose less blood, be exposed to more fluoroscopy, and leave the hospital sooner than their open counterparts. Patient-reported outcomes, including VAS pain scores and ODI values, were clinically equivalent between the MIS and open cohorts at 12 to 36 months postoperatively. Trends toward lower rates of surgical and medical adverse events were also identified in patients undergoing MIS procedures. However, in the absence of randomization, selection bias may have influenced these results in favor of MIS fusion.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence examining MIS versus open TLIF/PLIF is of low to very low quality and therefore highly biased. Results of this systematic review suggest equipoise in surgical and clinical outcomes with equivalent rates of intraoperative surgical complications and perhaps a slight decrease in perioperative medical complications. However, the quality of the current literature precludes firm conclusions regarding the comparative effectiveness of MIS versus open posterior lumbar fusion from being drawn and further higher-quality studies are critically required.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Disability Evaluation; Fluoroscopy; Humans; Length of Stay; Lumbar Vertebrae; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Operative Time; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative; Spinal Fusion; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24464507
DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3465-5 -
Materials (Basel, Switzerland) Oct 2023The first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint is a frequently loaded joint, handling loads up to 90% of bodyweight. First MTP arthrodesis is a frequently performed procedure... (Review)
Review
The first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint is a frequently loaded joint, handling loads up to 90% of bodyweight. First MTP arthrodesis is a frequently performed procedure designed to improve pain in patients with degenerative MTP joint disease. There are a wide variety of fixation constructs for this procedure without consensus on the most effective method. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical integrity of various constructs utilized for first MTP arthrodesis. A systematic review of the literature was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to 18 June 2023. Articles discussing the biomechanics of first MTP arthrodesis constructs were included. A total of 168 articles were retrieved. A total of 20 articles involving 446 cadaveric and synthetic bone constructs were included in the final review. Of the six articles comparing dorsal plating with compression screws to crossed interfragmentary screws, five found that dorsal plating had significantly higher stiffness. All three studies assessing shape-memory staples found them to be significantly less stable than crossed screws or dorsal plates alone. Both studies evaluating fully threaded screws found them to be stronger than crossed cancellous screws. Wedge resections have been shown to be 10 times stronger than standard planar or conical excision. Dorsal plating with compression screws is the gold standard for MTP arthrodesis. However, more research into newer methods such as fully threaded screws and wedge resections with an increased focus on translation to clinical outcomes is needed.
PubMed: 37834699
DOI: 10.3390/ma16196562 -
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 -
JBJS Reviews Oct 2022Noninvasive assessment of osseous fusion after spinal fusion surgery is essential for timely diagnosis of patients with symptomatic pseudarthrosis and for evaluation of...
BACKGROUND
Noninvasive assessment of osseous fusion after spinal fusion surgery is essential for timely diagnosis of patients with symptomatic pseudarthrosis and for evaluation of the performance of spinal fusion procedures. There is, however, no consensus on the definition and assessment of successful posterolateral fusion (PLF) of the lumbar spine. This systematic review aimed to (1) summarize the criteria used for imaging-based fusion assessment after instrumented PLF and (2) evaluate their diagnostic accuracy and reliability.
METHODS
First, a search of the literature was conducted in November 2018 to identify reproducible criteria for imaging-based fusion assessment after primary instrumented PLF between T10 and S1 in adult patients, and to determine their frequency of use. A second search in July 2021 was directed at primary studies on the diagnostic accuracy (with surgical exploration as the reference) and/or reliability (interobserver and intraobserver agreement) of these criteria. Article selection and data extraction were performed by at least 2 reviewers independently. The methodological quality of validation studies was assessed with the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2) and QAREL (Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies).
RESULTS
Of the 187 articles included from the first search, 47% used a classification system and 63% used ≥1 descriptive criterion related to osseous bridging (104 articles), absence of motion (78 articles), and/or absence of static signs of nonunion (39 articles). A great variation in terminology, cutoff values, and assessed anatomical locations was observed. While the use of computed tomography (CT) increased over time, radiographs remained predominant. The second search yielded 11 articles with considerable variation in outcomes and quality concerns. Agreement between imaging-based assessment and surgical exploration with regard to demonstration of fusion ranged between 55% and 80%, while reliability ranged from poor to excellent.
CONCLUSIONS
None of the available criteria for noninvasive assessment of fusion status after instrumented PLF were demonstrated to have both sufficient accuracy and reliability. Further elaboration and validation of a well-defined systematic CT-based assessment method that allows grading of the intertransverse and interfacet fusion mass at each side of each fusion level and includes signs of nonunion is recommended.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Reproducibility of Results; Spinal Fusion; Lumbosacral Region; Lumbar Vertebrae; Spinal Diseases
PubMed: 36325766
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.22.00129 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Oct 2018Knee arthrodesis with intramedullary (IM) nail or external fixator (EF) is the most reliable therapeutic option to achieve definitive infection control in patients with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Re-infection rates and clinical outcomes following arthrodesis with intramedullary nail and external fixator for infected knee prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Knee arthrodesis with intramedullary (IM) nail or external fixator (EF) is the most reliable therapeutic option to achieve definitive infection control in patients with septic failure of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The first aim of this study was to compare re-infection rates following knee arthrodesis for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) with IM nail or EF. The second aim was to compare rates of radiographic union, complication, and re-operation as well as clinical outcomes.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in electronic databases for longitudinal studies of PJIs (minimum ten patients; minimum follow-up = 1 year) treated by knee arthrodesis with IM nail or EF. Studies were also required to report the rate of re-infection as an outcome measure. Eligible studies were meta-analyzed using random-effect models.
RESULTS
The rate (95% confidence intervals) of re-infection was 10.6% (95% CI 7.3 to 14.0) in IM nail arthrodesis studies. The corresponding re-infection rate for EF was 5.4% (95% CI 1.7 to 9.1). This difference was significant (p = 0.009). The use of IM nail resulted in more advantages than EF for frequency of major complications and limb shortening. Other postoperative clinical and radiographic outcomes were similar for both surgical strategies.
CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence from the aggregate published data suggests that knee arthrodesis with EF in the specific context of PJI has a reduced risk of re-infection in comparison with the IM nail strategy. The use of IM nail is more effective for the complication rate and shortening of the affected limb.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Arthrodesis; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Bone Nails; External Fixators; Female; Humans; Knee Prosthesis; Male; Middle Aged; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Recurrence; Reoperation; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30301462
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-018-2283-4