The Efficacy of the Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (MILD®) Procedure: A PRISMA-compliant Systemic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Pain physician Pub Date : 2025-03-01
Xin-Yu Zhang, Jian-Li Zhao, Ya-Jing Wang, Jie Luan, Hong-Qi Lin, Dajie Wang
{"title":"The Efficacy of the Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (MILD®) Procedure: A PRISMA-compliant Systemic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Xin-Yu Zhang, Jian-Li Zhao, Ya-Jing Wang, Jie Luan, Hong-Qi Lin, Dajie Wang","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lumbar spinal stenosis is the most common cause for spinal surgery of older adults. It is associated with pain in the legs and back as well as impaired ambulation. Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (MILD®, Vertos Medical) is a percutaneous, image-guided lumbar decompression technique for central canal stenosis secondary to a hypertrophied ligamentum flavum. However, whether MILD can achieve adequate beneficial results in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis remains undetermined.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the efficacy and complications of MILD for lumbar spinal stenosis.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic databases were searched to identify all clinical trials of patients undergoing MILD surgery. Primary outcomes included Visual Analog Scale scores (VAS) or Oswestry Disability Index scores (ODI) at baseline, < 6 months posttreatment, = one year posttreatment. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications. For continuous variables, the treatment effects were calculated by weighted mean difference and 95% CI. The statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 334 trials identified; 12 of them, with data from 500 patients, were included in our analysis. MILD treatment resulted in a significant decrease in the mean pain score compared to the baseline (P < 0.01). There is a consistent pattern of decreased mean ODI scores following MILD compared to the baseline (P < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The included MILD clinical trials did not have the same exclusion and inclusion criteria. While all clinical trials in this study adopted conservative treatments prior to MILD, there were no standardized treatment modalities and length of time. All of the studies employed subjective outcome tools including VAS and ODI. However, these self-reported outcome tools are subject to bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study suggests MILD is an effective and safe surgical technique for patients with stenosis from ligamentum flavum hypertrophy. This technique resulted in significant clinical improvement, as indicated by changes in pain scores and ODI scores. In addition, adverse events were low compared to other surgical decompression techniques. To further confirm this, more well designed and powered randomized trials are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":19841,"journal":{"name":"Pain physician","volume":"28 2","pages":"71-81"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain physician","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis is the most common cause for spinal surgery of older adults. It is associated with pain in the legs and back as well as impaired ambulation. Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (MILD®, Vertos Medical) is a percutaneous, image-guided lumbar decompression technique for central canal stenosis secondary to a hypertrophied ligamentum flavum. However, whether MILD can achieve adequate beneficial results in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis remains undetermined.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and complications of MILD for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Study design: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: Electronic databases were searched to identify all clinical trials of patients undergoing MILD surgery. Primary outcomes included Visual Analog Scale scores (VAS) or Oswestry Disability Index scores (ODI) at baseline, < 6 months posttreatment, = one year posttreatment. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications. For continuous variables, the treatment effects were calculated by weighted mean difference and 95% CI. The statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05.

Results: There were 334 trials identified; 12 of them, with data from 500 patients, were included in our analysis. MILD treatment resulted in a significant decrease in the mean pain score compared to the baseline (P < 0.01). There is a consistent pattern of decreased mean ODI scores following MILD compared to the baseline (P < 0.01).

Limitations: The included MILD clinical trials did not have the same exclusion and inclusion criteria. While all clinical trials in this study adopted conservative treatments prior to MILD, there were no standardized treatment modalities and length of time. All of the studies employed subjective outcome tools including VAS and ODI. However, these self-reported outcome tools are subject to bias.

Conclusions: Our study suggests MILD is an effective and safe surgical technique for patients with stenosis from ligamentum flavum hypertrophy. This technique resulted in significant clinical improvement, as indicated by changes in pain scores and ODI scores. In addition, adverse events were low compared to other surgical decompression techniques. To further confirm this, more well designed and powered randomized trials are needed.

微创腰椎减压术 (MILD®) 的疗效:符合PRISMA标准的系统回顾和元分析。
背景:腰椎管狭窄是老年人脊柱手术最常见的原因。它与腿部和背部疼痛以及行走障碍有关。微创腰椎减压术(MILD®,Vertos Medical)是一种经皮、图像引导的腰椎减压技术,用于继发于黄韧带肥大的中央椎管狭窄。然而,MILD是否能在腰椎管狭窄症患者中取得足够的有益效果仍不确定。目的:评价MILD治疗腰椎管狭窄症的疗效及并发症。研究设计:系统回顾和荟萃分析。方法:检索电子数据库,确定所有轻度手术患者的临床试验。主要结局包括基线、治疗后< 6个月、治疗后1年的视觉模拟量表评分(VAS)或Oswestry残疾指数评分(ODI)。次要结局包括术后并发症。对于连续变量,采用加权平均差和95% CI计算治疗效果。P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。结果:共纳入334项试验;其中12个,来自500名患者的数据,被纳入我们的分析。轻度治疗导致平均疼痛评分较基线显著降低(P < 0.01)。与基线相比,MILD后平均ODI评分下降的模式一致(P < 0.01)。局限性:纳入的轻度临床试验没有相同的排除和纳入标准。虽然本研究的所有临床试验在轻度轻中度之前均采用保守治疗,但没有标准化的治疗方式和治疗时间。所有研究均采用主观结局工具,包括VAS和ODI。然而,这些自我报告的结果工具存在偏见。结论:我们的研究表明轻度韧带狭窄是一种有效和安全的手术技术。通过疼痛评分和ODI评分的变化,这项技术显著改善了临床效果。此外,与其他手术减压技术相比,不良事件发生率低。为了进一步证实这一点,需要更多精心设计和有力的随机试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pain physician
Pain physician CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
21.60%
发文量
234
期刊介绍: Pain Physician Journal is the official publication of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP). The open access journal is published 6 times a year. Pain Physician Journal is a peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary, open access journal written by and directed to an audience of interventional pain physicians, clinicians and basic scientists with an interest in interventional pain management and pain medicine. Pain Physician Journal presents the latest studies, research, and information vital to those in the emerging specialty of interventional pain management – and critical to the people they serve.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信