Eficacia de la descompresión medular precoz versus tardía en la recuperación neurológica tras lesión medular traumática. Revisión sistemática y metaanálisis

Q3 Medicine
{"title":"Eficacia de la descompresión medular precoz versus tardía en la recuperación neurológica tras lesión medular traumática. Revisión sistemática y metaanálisis","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.recot.2023.09.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Study design</h3><p>Systematic review and meta-analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To compare early (&lt;24<!--> <!-->h) versus late (&gt;24<!--> <!-->h) spinal cord decompression on neurological recovery in patients with acute spinal cord injury.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA protocol to identify studies published up to December 2022.</p><p>Prospective cohort studies and controlled trials comparing early versus delayed decompression on neurological recovery were included. Variables included number of patients, level of injury, treatment time, ASIA grade, neurological recovery, use of corticosteroids, and complications. For the meta-analysis, the «forest plot» graph was developed. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the ROBINS-I22 and Rob223 tools.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Six of the seven studies selected for our review were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 1188 patients (592 patients in the early decompression group and 596 in the delayed decompression group), the mean follow-up was 8 months, in 5 studies used methylprednisolone, the most reported complications were thromboembolic cardiopulmonary events.</p><p>Five studies showed significant differences in favor of early decompression (risk difference 0.10, 95% confidence interval 0.07–0.14, heterogeneity 46%). The benefit was greatest in cervical and incomplete injuries.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There is scientific evidence to recommend early decompression in the first 24<!--> <!-->h after traumatic spinal cord injury, as it improves final neurological recovery, and it should be recommended whenever the patient and hospital conditions allow it to be safely done.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":39664,"journal":{"name":"Revista Espanola de Cirugia Ortopedica y Traumatologia","volume":"68 5","pages":"Pages 524-536"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S188844152300200X/pdfft?md5=0ab72d66520b098d92df2f8d7bd16c99&pid=1-s2.0-S188844152300200X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Espanola de Cirugia Ortopedica y Traumatologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S188844152300200X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective

To compare early (<24 h) versus late (>24 h) spinal cord decompression on neurological recovery in patients with acute spinal cord injury.

Methods

A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA protocol to identify studies published up to December 2022.

Prospective cohort studies and controlled trials comparing early versus delayed decompression on neurological recovery were included. Variables included number of patients, level of injury, treatment time, ASIA grade, neurological recovery, use of corticosteroids, and complications. For the meta-analysis, the «forest plot» graph was developed. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the ROBINS-I22 and Rob223 tools.

Results

Six of the seven studies selected for our review were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 1188 patients (592 patients in the early decompression group and 596 in the delayed decompression group), the mean follow-up was 8 months, in 5 studies used methylprednisolone, the most reported complications were thromboembolic cardiopulmonary events.

Five studies showed significant differences in favor of early decompression (risk difference 0.10, 95% confidence interval 0.07–0.14, heterogeneity 46%). The benefit was greatest in cervical and incomplete injuries.

Conclusion

There is scientific evidence to recommend early decompression in the first 24 h after traumatic spinal cord injury, as it improves final neurological recovery, and it should be recommended whenever the patient and hospital conditions allow it to be safely done.

早期与延迟脊髓减压在外伤性脊髓损伤后神经恢复中的疗效。系统综述和荟萃分析。
研究设计:系统回顾和荟萃分析。目的:比较早期(24小时)脊髓减压对急性脊髓损伤患者神经功能恢复的影响。方法:根据PRISMA方案进行系统综述,以确定截至2022年12月发表的研究。前瞻性队列研究和对照试验比较了早期减压与延迟减压对神经系统恢复的影响。变量包括患者数量、损伤程度、治疗时间、ASIA分级、神经系统恢复、皮质类固醇的使用和并发症。对于荟萃分析,开发了“森林图”图。使用ROBINS-I22和Rob223工具评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。结果:我们选择的7项研究中有6项纳入荟萃分析,共有1188名患者(早期减压组592名患者,延迟减压组596名患者),平均随访时间为8个月,在5项使用甲基强的松龙的研究中,报告的并发症最多的是血栓栓塞性心肺事件。五项研究显示有利于早期减压的显著差异(风险差异0.10,95%置信区间0.07-0.14,异质性46%)。对颈部和不完全性损伤的益处最大。结论:有科学证据建议在创伤性脊髓损伤后的前24小时进行早期减压,因为这可以改善最终的神经系统恢复,只要患者和医院条件允许,就应该建议进行减压。
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
156
审稿时长
51 weeks
期刊介绍: Es una magnífica revista para acceder a los mejores artículos de investigación en la especialidad y los casos clínicos de mayor interés. Además, es la Publicación Oficial de la Sociedad, y está incluida en prestigiosos índices de referencia en medicina.
×
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