Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

被引:117
|
作者
Yavin, Daniel [1 ,2 ]
Casha, Steven [1 ,3 ]
Wiebe, Samuel [2 ,3 ,4 ,5 ]
Feasby, Thomas E. [2 ,3 ,4 ,5 ]
Clark, Callie [2 ]
Isaacs, Albert [1 ]
Holroyd-Leduc, Jayna [2 ,3 ,6 ]
Hurlbert, R. John [7 ]
Quan, Hude [2 ,5 ]
Nataraj, Andrew [8 ]
Sutherland, Garnette R. [1 ,3 ]
Jette, Nathalie [2 ,3 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calgary, Cumming Sch Med, Dept Clin Neurosci, Div Neurosurg, Calgary, AB, Canada
[2] Univ Calgary, Cumming Sch Med, Dept Community Hlth Sci, Calgary, AB, Canada
[3] Univ Calgary, Cumming Sch Med, Hotchkiss Brain Inst, Calgary, AB, Canada
[4] Univ Calgary, Cumming Sch Med, Dept Clin Neurosci, Div Neurol, Calgary, AB, Canada
[5] Univ Calgary, Cumming Sch Med, OBrien Inst Publ Hlth, Calgary, AB, Canada
[6] Univ Calgary, Cumming Sch Med, Dept Med, Calgary, AB, Canada
[7] Univ Arizona, Dept Surg, Div Neurosurg, Tucson, AZ USA
[8] Univ Alberta, Div Neurosurg, Dept Surg, Edmonton, AB, Canada
关键词
Decompression; Fusion; Lowback pain; Lumbar spondylosis; Meta-analysis; Spinal stenosis; Spondylolisthesis; LOW-BACK-PAIN; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; HEALTH-CARE-COST; SPINAL STENOSIS; FOLLOW-UP; NONSURGICAL TREATMENT; INSTRUMENTED FUSION; REOPERATION-RATES; COGNITIVE INTERVENTION; SURGICAL-TREATMENT;
D O I
10.1093/neuros/nyw162
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND: Due to uncertain evidence, lumbar fusion for degenerative indications is associated with the greatest measured practice variation of any surgical procedure. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the current evidence on the comparative safety and efficacy of lumbar fusion, decompression-alone, or nonoperative care for degenerative indications. METHODS: Asystematic reviewwas conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (up to June 30, 2016). Comparative studies reporting validated measures of safety or efficacy were included. Treatment effects were calculated through DerSimonian and Laird random effects models. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 65 studies (19 randomized controlled trials, 16 prospective cohort studies, 15 retrospective cohort studies, and 15 registries) enrolling a total of 302 620 patients. Disability, pain, and patient satisfaction following fusion, decompression-alone, or nonoperative care were dependent on surgical indications and study methodology. Relative to decompression-alone, the risk of reoperation following fusion was increased for spinal stenosis (relative risk [RR] 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.28) and decreased for spondylolisthesis (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.83). Among patients with spinal stenosis, complications were more frequent following fusion (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.18-2.96). Mortality was not significantly associated with any treatment modality. CONCLUSION: Positive clinical change was greatest in patients undergoing fusion for spondylolisthesis while complications and the risk of reoperation limited the benefit of fusion for spinal stenosis. The relative safety and efficacy of fusion for chronic low back pain suggests careful patient selection is required (PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews number, CRD42015020153).
引用
收藏
页码:701 / 714
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Letter: Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Goel, Atul
    NEUROSURGERY, 2017, 81 (05) : E64 - E65
  • [2] Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis COMMENT
    Whitmore, Robert G.
    NEUROSURGERY, 2017, 80 (05) : 714 - 715
  • [3] Fusion or Not for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
    Shen, Jieliang
    Xu, Shen
    Xu, Shenxi
    Ye, Sen
    Hao, Jie
    PAIN PHYSICIAN, 2018, 21 (01) : 1 - 7
  • [4] Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: systematic review and meta-analysis
    Kevin Phan
    Prashanth J. Rao
    Andrew C. Kam
    Ralph J. Mobbs
    European Spine Journal, 2015, 24 : 1017 - 1030
  • [5] Effect of interbody fusion compared with posterolateral fusion on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Dantas, Francois
    Rolemberg Dantas, Fernando Luiz
    Botelho, Ricardo Vieira
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2022, 22 (05): : 756 - 768
  • [6] Comparison of instrumented and stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Lianghai Jiang
    Lantao Liu
    Liang Dong
    Zhengwei Xu
    Xiaobo Zhang
    Lixiong Qian
    BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 25
  • [7] Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: systematic review and meta-analysis
    Phan, Kevin
    Rao, Prashanth J.
    Kam, Andrew C.
    Mobbs, Ralph J.
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 24 (05) : 1017 - 1030
  • [8] Comparison of instrumented and stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Jiang, Lianghai
    Liu, Lantao
    Dong, Liang
    Xu, Zhengwei
    Zhang, Xiaobo
    Qian, Lixiong
    BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2024, 25 (01)
  • [9] Oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Yun-lu Wang
    Xi-yong Li
    Lun Liu
    Song-feng Li
    Peng-fei Han
    Xiao-dong Li
    Neurosurgical Review, 46
  • [10] Oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Wang, Yun-lu
    Li, Xi-yong
    Liu, Lun
    Li, Song-feng
    Han, Peng-fei
    Li, Xiao-dong
    NEUROSURGICAL REVIEW, 2023, 46 (01)