经皮微创与开放脊柱手术治疗胸腰段连接处骨折的比较疗效回顾。

Giuseppe M V Barbagallo, Emily Yoder, Joseph R Dettori, Vincenzo Albanese
{"title":"经皮微创与开放脊柱手术治疗胸腰段连接处骨折的比较疗效回顾。","authors":"Giuseppe M V Barbagallo,&nbsp;Emily Yoder,&nbsp;Joseph R Dettori,&nbsp;Vincenzo Albanese","doi":"10.1055/s-0032-1327809","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong> Comparative effectiveness review.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong> To determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of percutaneous minimally invasive versus open spine surgery for fractures of the thoracolumbar junction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> A systematic review of the English-language literature was undertaken for articles published between 1970 and March 15, 2012. Reference lists of key articles were also systematically checked. We attempted to identify all articles that reported on the effectiveness and/or safety comparing minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with open surgery for thoracolumbar fractures in the adult population. Articles containing hematological or neoplastic fractures primarily were excluded. Other exclusions included reviews, editorials, case series, non-English-language written studies, and animal studies. We rated the overall body of evidence using a modified Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system for diagnostic and therapeutic studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>• Two studies (Level of Evidence III) met our inclusion criteria. • Radiographic outcomes were similar between treatment groups. • Postoperative incisional pain was less in patients undergoing percutaneous MIS. • Patient function as assessed by the Hannover Spine Score, the SF-36 and the MacNab criteria were slightly higher in the percutaneous minimally invasive group, but not statistically significant. • Percutaneous MIS resulted in less blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay than open surgery. • No complications were reported using percutaneous MIS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Limited data suggest that percutaneous techniques are associated with less postoperative pain, less blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, and a slightly better functional outcome. However, concerns remain on the effectiveness of percutaneous techniques in correcting spinal deformity and achieving bony fusion. Further studies are needed to verify these preliminary findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":89675,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based spine-care journal","volume":"3 3","pages":"43-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/s-0032-1327809","citationCount":"24","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Percutaneous minimally invasive versus open spine surgery in the treatment of fractures of the thoracolumbar junction: a comparative effectiveness review.\",\"authors\":\"Giuseppe M V Barbagallo,&nbsp;Emily Yoder,&nbsp;Joseph R Dettori,&nbsp;Vincenzo Albanese\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0032-1327809\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong> Comparative effectiveness review.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong> To determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of percutaneous minimally invasive versus open spine surgery for fractures of the thoracolumbar junction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> A systematic review of the English-language literature was undertaken for articles published between 1970 and March 15, 2012. Reference lists of key articles were also systematically checked. We attempted to identify all articles that reported on the effectiveness and/or safety comparing minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with open surgery for thoracolumbar fractures in the adult population. Articles containing hematological or neoplastic fractures primarily were excluded. Other exclusions included reviews, editorials, case series, non-English-language written studies, and animal studies. We rated the overall body of evidence using a modified Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system for diagnostic and therapeutic studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>• Two studies (Level of Evidence III) met our inclusion criteria. • Radiographic outcomes were similar between treatment groups. • Postoperative incisional pain was less in patients undergoing percutaneous MIS. • Patient function as assessed by the Hannover Spine Score, the SF-36 and the MacNab criteria were slightly higher in the percutaneous minimally invasive group, but not statistically significant. • Percutaneous MIS resulted in less blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay than open surgery. • No complications were reported using percutaneous MIS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Limited data suggest that percutaneous techniques are associated with less postoperative pain, less blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, and a slightly better functional outcome. However, concerns remain on the effectiveness of percutaneous techniques in correcting spinal deformity and achieving bony fusion. Further studies are needed to verify these preliminary findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":89675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence-based spine-care journal\",\"volume\":\"3 3\",\"pages\":\"43-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/s-0032-1327809\",\"citationCount\":\"24\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence-based spine-care journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1327809\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based spine-care journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1327809","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

摘要

研究设计:比较疗效评价。目的:比较经皮微创与开放脊柱手术治疗胸腰椎交界部骨折的有效性和安全性。方法:对1970年至2012年3月15日期间发表的英文文献进行系统综述。系统核对了重点文献的参考书目。我们试图找出所有报道微创手术(MIS)与开放手术治疗成人胸腰椎骨折的有效性和/或安全性的文章。包含血液学或肿瘤骨折的文章主要被排除在外。其他排除包括综述、社论、病例系列、非英语写作研究和动物研究。我们对诊断和治疗研究使用改良的推荐评估、发展和评价等级(GRADE)系统对总体证据进行评级。•两项研究(证据水平为III)符合我们的纳入标准。•放射学结果在治疗组之间相似。•经皮MIS患者术后切口疼痛较少。•汉诺威脊柱评分、SF-36和MacNab标准评估的患者功能在经皮微创组略高,但无统计学意义。•与开放手术相比,经皮MIS出血量少,住院时间短。•经皮MIS无并发症报道。结论:有限的数据表明,经皮穿刺技术与更少的术后疼痛、更少的失血、更短的住院时间和稍好的功能预后相关。然而,经皮技术在纠正脊柱畸形和实现骨融合方面的有效性仍然值得关注。需要进一步的研究来证实这些初步发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Percutaneous minimally invasive versus open spine surgery in the treatment of fractures of the thoracolumbar junction: a comparative effectiveness review.

Percutaneous minimally invasive versus open spine surgery in the treatment of fractures of the thoracolumbar junction: a comparative effectiveness review.

Percutaneous minimally invasive versus open spine surgery in the treatment of fractures of the thoracolumbar junction: a comparative effectiveness review.

Percutaneous minimally invasive versus open spine surgery in the treatment of fractures of the thoracolumbar junction: a comparative effectiveness review.

Study design:  Comparative effectiveness review.

Objective:  To determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of percutaneous minimally invasive versus open spine surgery for fractures of the thoracolumbar junction.

Methods:  A systematic review of the English-language literature was undertaken for articles published between 1970 and March 15, 2012. Reference lists of key articles were also systematically checked. We attempted to identify all articles that reported on the effectiveness and/or safety comparing minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with open surgery for thoracolumbar fractures in the adult population. Articles containing hematological or neoplastic fractures primarily were excluded. Other exclusions included reviews, editorials, case series, non-English-language written studies, and animal studies. We rated the overall body of evidence using a modified Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system for diagnostic and therapeutic studies.

Results: • Two studies (Level of Evidence III) met our inclusion criteria. • Radiographic outcomes were similar between treatment groups. • Postoperative incisional pain was less in patients undergoing percutaneous MIS. • Patient function as assessed by the Hannover Spine Score, the SF-36 and the MacNab criteria were slightly higher in the percutaneous minimally invasive group, but not statistically significant. • Percutaneous MIS resulted in less blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay than open surgery. • No complications were reported using percutaneous MIS.

Conclusion:  Limited data suggest that percutaneous techniques are associated with less postoperative pain, less blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, and a slightly better functional outcome. However, concerns remain on the effectiveness of percutaneous techniques in correcting spinal deformity and achieving bony fusion. Further studies are needed to verify these preliminary findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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