Meta-analysis of fusion with and without instrumentation in the treatment of chronic low back pain
- VernacularTitle:单纯融合与内固定融合治疗慢性腰痛的Meta分析
- Author:
Haifei ZHANG
;
Yue ZHU
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Low back pain;
Spinal fusion;
Randomized controlled trials;
Meta-analysis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedics
2008;28(8):628-633
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of fusion with and without instrumentation in the treatment of chronic low back pain.Methods To search Medline(from 1966 to Deeember.2006).Embase (1984 to December,2006),Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial f4th Quarter 2006),Current Controlled Trials.The China Biological Medicine Database(1984 to December,2006).and hand searched several related journals.The quality of included trials was evaluated.Data were extracted by two reviewers independently with a designed extraction form RevMan 4.2.8 software was used for data analysis.Results Eight studies involving 656 patients were included.The results of meta-analysis indicated that statistically significant difierences were observed between the two operative procedures in the fusion rate(OR=2.26,95% CI 1.51-3.38,P=0.0001),clinical outcome(OR=1.54,95%CI 1.09-2.19,P=0.01),incidence of re-operation (OR=2.16.95% CI 1.08-4.33,P=0.002).There were no statistically significant difierences in back pain scores (WMD=-0.22,95% CI-0.81-0.36),leg pain scores(WMD=0.22,95%CI-0.50-0.93),complications(OR=1.68,95%CI 0.78-3.63),satisfaction of surgery by patients(OR=1.54,95%CI 0.93-2.55).Three studies described the mean surgical time,perioperative blood loss,days in hospital after surgery,which revealed that single fusion was superior to fusion with instrumentation.Three studies described the work status of patients post-operatively.Two studies indicated smoking could decrease the fusion rate.Conclusion To compare with single fusion,fusion with instrumentation can increase the fusion rate and improve clinical outcome slightly,but it also increases the incidence of re-operation.More high quality large-scale randomized controlled trims are required.
