Comparison of 7 surgical interventions for recurrent lumbar disc herniation: A network meta-analysis and systematic review.

IF 2.6 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2025-03-04 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0309343
Hang Zhang, Junmao Gao, Qipeng Xie, Mingxin Zhang
{"title":"Comparison of 7 surgical interventions for recurrent lumbar disc herniation: A network meta-analysis and systematic review.","authors":"Hang Zhang, Junmao Gao, Qipeng Xie, Mingxin Zhang","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0309343","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Network meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons of recurrence lumbar disc herniation.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of comparing the differences between different surgical approaches for recurrent lumbar disc herniation (LDH).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched for articles published before April 10th, 2024. The Markov chain Monte Carlo methods were used to perform a hierarchical Bayesian NMA in R version 4.3.3 using a random effects consistency model. The assessing outcomes were pain intensity, disability, complications and recurrence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>20 studies including 1556 patients and 7 different approaches (PELD, MED, MIS-TLIF, TLIF, Unilat -TLIF, PLIF and OD) were retrospectively retrieved. the efficacy of each approach was the same in relieving pain, OD was significantly better than PELD and MIS-TLIF in relieving dysfunction (SMD: 1.9[0.21,3.4] and 2.0[0.084,3.8], respectively), In addition, MIS-TLIF was significantly lower than PELD and MED in the complication rate (SMD: 0.37[0.14,0.84] and 0.15[0.034,0.68], respectively), TLIF was significantly Lower than MED in the complication rate (SMD:0.14 [0.027,0.70]), PELD was significantly higher than MIS-TLIF, TLIF and PLIF in the recurrence rate (SMD: 1.3e-17 [2.4e-44,0.00016],1.2e-12[2.1e-36,0.34] and 1.4e-12[6.2e-35,0.013], respectively), MED was significantly higher than MIS-TLIF and PLIF in the recurrence rate (SMD: 2.6e-17[5.6e-44,0.0037] and 3.1e-12[1.6e-34,0.022], respectively), OD was significantly higher than MIS-TLIF, TLIF and PLIF in the recurrence rate (SMD:4.6e+16[2.3e+02,3.0e+43], 4.3e+11[2.4,2.5e+35] and 4.1e+11[35,8.7e+33], respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation, vertebral fusion surgery is superior to repeat discectomy. At the same time, MIS-TLIF may be a preferable surgical procedure in the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"20 3","pages":"e0309343"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11878942/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0309343","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: Network meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons of recurrence lumbar disc herniation.

Objective: The purpose of comparing the differences between different surgical approaches for recurrent lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

Methods: The PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched for articles published before April 10th, 2024. The Markov chain Monte Carlo methods were used to perform a hierarchical Bayesian NMA in R version 4.3.3 using a random effects consistency model. The assessing outcomes were pain intensity, disability, complications and recurrence.

Results: 20 studies including 1556 patients and 7 different approaches (PELD, MED, MIS-TLIF, TLIF, Unilat -TLIF, PLIF and OD) were retrospectively retrieved. the efficacy of each approach was the same in relieving pain, OD was significantly better than PELD and MIS-TLIF in relieving dysfunction (SMD: 1.9[0.21,3.4] and 2.0[0.084,3.8], respectively), In addition, MIS-TLIF was significantly lower than PELD and MED in the complication rate (SMD: 0.37[0.14,0.84] and 0.15[0.034,0.68], respectively), TLIF was significantly Lower than MED in the complication rate (SMD:0.14 [0.027,0.70]), PELD was significantly higher than MIS-TLIF, TLIF and PLIF in the recurrence rate (SMD: 1.3e-17 [2.4e-44,0.00016],1.2e-12[2.1e-36,0.34] and 1.4e-12[6.2e-35,0.013], respectively), MED was significantly higher than MIS-TLIF and PLIF in the recurrence rate (SMD: 2.6e-17[5.6e-44,0.0037] and 3.1e-12[1.6e-34,0.022], respectively), OD was significantly higher than MIS-TLIF, TLIF and PLIF in the recurrence rate (SMD:4.6e+16[2.3e+02,3.0e+43], 4.3e+11[2.4,2.5e+35] and 4.1e+11[35,8.7e+33], respectively).

Conclusions: In the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation, vertebral fusion surgery is superior to repeat discectomy. At the same time, MIS-TLIF may be a preferable surgical procedure in the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
7种手术干预治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症的比较:网络荟萃分析和系统评价。
研究设计:对复发性腰椎间盘突出症的多种治疗比较进行网络荟萃分析。目的:比较不同手术入路治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症(LDH)的差异。方法:检索2024年4月10日前发表的PubMed、Embase、MEDLINE、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、谷歌Scholar和中国国家知识基础设施数据库。采用马尔可夫链蒙特卡罗方法在R 4.3.3版本中使用随机效应一致性模型执行分层贝叶斯NMA。评估结果为疼痛强度、残疾、并发症和复发。结果:回顾性检索了20项研究,包括1556例患者和7种不同的入路(PELD、MED、MIS-TLIF、TLIF、Unilat -TLIF、PLIF和OD)。两种方法在缓解疼痛方面的效果相同,OD在缓解功能障碍方面明显优于PELD和MIS-TLIF (SMD分别为1.9[0.21,3.4]和2.0[0.084,3.8]),MIS-TLIF的并发症发生率也明显低于PELD和MED (SMD:分别为0.37[0.14,0.84]和0.15[0.034,0.68]),TLIF的并发症发生率显著低于MED (SMD:0.14 [0.027,0.70]), PELD的复发率显著高于MIS-TLIF、TLIF和PLIF (SMD: 1.3e-17 [2.4e-44,0.00016]、1.2e-12[2.11 e-36,0.34]和1.4e-12[6.2e-35,0.013]), MED的复发率显著高于MIS-TLIF和PLIF (SMD:分别为2.60 e-17[5.60 e-44,0.0037]和3.11 e-12[1.60 e-34,0.022]), OD复发率明显高于MIS-TLIF、TLIF和PLIF (SMD分别为4.6e+16[2.3e+02,3.0e+43]、4.3e+11[2.4,2.5e+35]和4.1e+11[35,8.7e+33])。结论:治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症,椎体融合术优于重复椎间盘切除术。同时,MIS-TLIF可能是治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症的较好手术方法。
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 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE 生物-生物学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
14242
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage
期刊最新文献
CDR-Net: A computerized framework to detect Alzheimer's diseases and mild cognitive impairment. Computational investigation of African natural products as Helicobacter pylori shikimate kinase inhibitors. Which turtle should I study? Uneven distribution of research effort across Testudines species. Local causal dynamic integrated global mode guidance transformer network for pedestrian trajectory prediction. Vector-borne disease surveillance and control resource needs in Colorado public health organizations.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1