A. Lychagin, V. Cherepanov, A. Garkavi, M. Lipina, I. Lisitzky, A. Korkunov, A. Zarov, A. Gritsyuk, M. Elizarov, G. Prah, Vyazankin Ivan
{"title":"单侧椎弓根螺钉固定与双侧椎弓根螺钉固定治疗单节段腰椎退行性脊柱:meta分析的系统回顾","authors":"A. Lychagin, V. Cherepanov, A. Garkavi, M. Lipina, I. Lisitzky, A. Korkunov, A. Zarov, A. Gritsyuk, M. Elizarov, G. Prah, Vyazankin Ivan","doi":"10.3889/oamjms.2023.11649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AIM: The objectives of this study were to perform a systematic literature review based on studies that compare unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation (PSF) in lumbosacral spine fusion to provide recommendations for the treatment of degenerative diseases of the spine, to identify studies with a more complete evidence base, and to identify possible limitations in available literature sources that require further research. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies that compare unilateral versus bilateral PSF versus interbody implant placement used the treatment of degenerative diseases of the lumbosacral spine. The study included meta-analyses that met the inclusion criteria. The quality of meta-analyses was evaluated with a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) score and the most relevant meta-analysis was determined by applying the Jadad algorithm. RESULTS: Twelve studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the study. The results of AMSTAR score ranged from 6 to 9, based on the results, four meta-analysis can be assigned to “middle” category and remained 8 to “upper” category. According to the results obtained, there was no significant difference between unilateral and bilateral PSF; however, unilateral fixation had advantages in the duration of surgical treatment and intraoperative blood loss. СONCLUSION: According to this systematic review, unilateral PSF is an effective fixation method in the formation of lumbosacral spine fusion and has advantages in reducing the duration of surgical treatment and intraoperative blood loss compared to bilateral PSF.","PeriodicalId":19562,"journal":{"name":"Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation versus Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation for Single-Level Lumbar Degenerative Spine: A Systematic Review of Meta-analyses\",\"authors\":\"A. Lychagin, V. Cherepanov, A. Garkavi, M. Lipina, I. Lisitzky, A. Korkunov, A. Zarov, A. Gritsyuk, M. Elizarov, G. Prah, Vyazankin Ivan\",\"doi\":\"10.3889/oamjms.2023.11649\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AIM: The objectives of this study were to perform a systematic literature review based on studies that compare unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation (PSF) in lumbosacral spine fusion to provide recommendations for the treatment of degenerative diseases of the spine, to identify studies with a more complete evidence base, and to identify possible limitations in available literature sources that require further research. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies that compare unilateral versus bilateral PSF versus interbody implant placement used the treatment of degenerative diseases of the lumbosacral spine. The study included meta-analyses that met the inclusion criteria. The quality of meta-analyses was evaluated with a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) score and the most relevant meta-analysis was determined by applying the Jadad algorithm. RESULTS: Twelve studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the study. The results of AMSTAR score ranged from 6 to 9, based on the results, four meta-analysis can be assigned to “middle” category and remained 8 to “upper” category. According to the results obtained, there was no significant difference between unilateral and bilateral PSF; however, unilateral fixation had advantages in the duration of surgical treatment and intraoperative blood loss. СONCLUSION: According to this systematic review, unilateral PSF is an effective fixation method in the formation of lumbosacral spine fusion and has advantages in reducing the duration of surgical treatment and intraoperative blood loss compared to bilateral PSF.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19562,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2023.11649\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2023.11649","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Unilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation versus Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation for Single-Level Lumbar Degenerative Spine: A Systematic Review of Meta-analyses
AIM: The objectives of this study were to perform a systematic literature review based on studies that compare unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation (PSF) in lumbosacral spine fusion to provide recommendations for the treatment of degenerative diseases of the spine, to identify studies with a more complete evidence base, and to identify possible limitations in available literature sources that require further research. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies that compare unilateral versus bilateral PSF versus interbody implant placement used the treatment of degenerative diseases of the lumbosacral spine. The study included meta-analyses that met the inclusion criteria. The quality of meta-analyses was evaluated with a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) score and the most relevant meta-analysis was determined by applying the Jadad algorithm. RESULTS: Twelve studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the study. The results of AMSTAR score ranged from 6 to 9, based on the results, four meta-analysis can be assigned to “middle” category and remained 8 to “upper” category. According to the results obtained, there was no significant difference between unilateral and bilateral PSF; however, unilateral fixation had advantages in the duration of surgical treatment and intraoperative blood loss. СONCLUSION: According to this systematic review, unilateral PSF is an effective fixation method in the formation of lumbosacral spine fusion and has advantages in reducing the duration of surgical treatment and intraoperative blood loss compared to bilateral PSF.
期刊介绍:
Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences (OAMJMS) [formerly known as Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences] is a top-tier open access medical science journal published by the ID Design 2012/DOOEL Skopje, Rajko Zhinzifov No 48, 1000 Skopje, Republic of Macedonia. OAMJMS is an international, modern, general medical journal covering all areas in the medical sciences, from basic studies to large clinical trials and cost-effectiveness analyses. We publish mostly human studies that substantially enhance our understanding of disease epidemiology, etiology, and physiology; the development of prognostic and diagnostic technologies; trials that test the efficacy of specific interventions and those that compare different treatments; and systematic reviews. We aim to promote translation of basic research into clinical investigation, and of clinical evidence into practice. We publish occasional studies in animal models when they report outstanding research findings that are highly clinically relevant. Our audience is the international medical community as well as educators, policy makers, patient advocacy groups, and interested members of the public around the world. OAMJMS is published quarterly online version. The Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences (OAMJMS) publishes Medical Informatics, Basic Science, Clinical Science, Case Report, Brief Communication, Public Health, Public Policy, and Review Article from all fields of medicine and related fields. This journal also publishes, continuously or occasionally, the bibliographies of the members of the Society, medical history, medical publications, thesis abstracts, book reviews, reports on meetings, information on future meetings, important events and dates, and various headings which contribute to the development of the corresponding scientific field.