与斜行腰椎椎间融合术相关的并发症:系统回顾

IF 0.1 Q4 SURGERY Surgical Techniques Development Pub Date : 2023-11-20 DOI:10.3390/std12040020
Quan Rui Tan, Russell Andrew Wong, Arun-Kumar Kaliya-Perumal, J. Oh
{"title":"与斜行腰椎椎间融合术相关的并发症:系统回顾","authors":"Quan Rui Tan, Russell Andrew Wong, Arun-Kumar Kaliya-Perumal, J. Oh","doi":"10.3390/std12040020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main advantage of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) is its ability to provide safe access to the lumbar spine while being a robust interbody fusion technique through a minimally invasive approach. This study reviews the postoperative complications of OLIF, offering a comprehensive understanding of its advantages and disadvantages. A total of 27 studies with 1275 patients were shortlisted based on our selection criteria. Complications were categorized into intra-operative, immediate post-operative, and delayed post-operative and were interpreted based on surgical procedure into stand-alone OLIF, OLIF with posterior stabilisation, and unspecified. Major complications exhibited a pooled prevalence of just 1.7%, whereas the overall pooled prevalence of complications was 24.7%. Among the subgroups, the stand-alone subgroup had the lowest prevalence of complications (14.6%) compared to the unspecified subgroup (29.6%) and the OLIF L2-5 with posterior stabilisation subgroup (25.8%). Similarly, for major complications, the stand-alone subgroup had the lowest prevalence (1.4%), while the OLIF L2-5 with posterior stabilisation subgroup (1.8%) and the unspecified OLIF L2-5 subgroup (1.6%) had higher rates. However, the differences were not statistically significant. In conclusion, the rate of major complications after OLIF is minimal, making it a safe procedure with significant benefits outweighing the risks. The advantages of OLIF L2-5 with posterior stabilisation over stand-alone OLIF L2-5 is a subject of discussion.","PeriodicalId":40379,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Techniques Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Complications Associated with Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Quan Rui Tan, Russell Andrew Wong, Arun-Kumar Kaliya-Perumal, J. Oh\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/std12040020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The main advantage of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) is its ability to provide safe access to the lumbar spine while being a robust interbody fusion technique through a minimally invasive approach. This study reviews the postoperative complications of OLIF, offering a comprehensive understanding of its advantages and disadvantages. A total of 27 studies with 1275 patients were shortlisted based on our selection criteria. Complications were categorized into intra-operative, immediate post-operative, and delayed post-operative and were interpreted based on surgical procedure into stand-alone OLIF, OLIF with posterior stabilisation, and unspecified. Major complications exhibited a pooled prevalence of just 1.7%, whereas the overall pooled prevalence of complications was 24.7%. Among the subgroups, the stand-alone subgroup had the lowest prevalence of complications (14.6%) compared to the unspecified subgroup (29.6%) and the OLIF L2-5 with posterior stabilisation subgroup (25.8%). Similarly, for major complications, the stand-alone subgroup had the lowest prevalence (1.4%), while the OLIF L2-5 with posterior stabilisation subgroup (1.8%) and the unspecified OLIF L2-5 subgroup (1.6%) had higher rates. However, the differences were not statistically significant. In conclusion, the rate of major complications after OLIF is minimal, making it a safe procedure with significant benefits outweighing the risks. The advantages of OLIF L2-5 with posterior stabilisation over stand-alone OLIF L2-5 is a subject of discussion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40379,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical Techniques Development\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical Techniques Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/std12040020\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Techniques Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/std12040020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

斜行腰椎椎体间融合术(OLIF)的主要优点是能够安全地进入腰椎,同时通过微创方法实现稳健的椎体间融合技术。本研究回顾了 OLIF 的术后并发症,对其优缺点有了全面的了解。根据我们的选择标准,共筛选出 27 项研究,涉及 1275 名患者。研究将并发症分为术中、术后即刻和术后延迟三类,并根据手术方式将并发症分为单独的OLIF、OLIF伴后路稳定和未指定三种。主要并发症的总发生率仅为1.7%,而并发症的总发生率为24.7%。在各分组中,独立分组的并发症发生率最低(14.6%),相比之下,未指定分组的并发症发生率为29.6%,OLIF L2-5 后方稳定分组的并发症发生率为25.8%。同样,在主要并发症方面,独立亚组的发生率最低(1.4%),而OLIF L2-5伴后路稳定亚组(1.8%)和未指定OLIF L2-5亚组(1.6%)的发生率较高。然而,这些差异在统计学上并不显著。总之,OLIF术后主要并发症的发生率极低,是一种安全的手术,其优点远远大于风险。与独立的OLIF L2-5相比,后路稳定的OLIF L2-5的优势是一个值得讨论的话题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Complications Associated with Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review
The main advantage of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) is its ability to provide safe access to the lumbar spine while being a robust interbody fusion technique through a minimally invasive approach. This study reviews the postoperative complications of OLIF, offering a comprehensive understanding of its advantages and disadvantages. A total of 27 studies with 1275 patients were shortlisted based on our selection criteria. Complications were categorized into intra-operative, immediate post-operative, and delayed post-operative and were interpreted based on surgical procedure into stand-alone OLIF, OLIF with posterior stabilisation, and unspecified. Major complications exhibited a pooled prevalence of just 1.7%, whereas the overall pooled prevalence of complications was 24.7%. Among the subgroups, the stand-alone subgroup had the lowest prevalence of complications (14.6%) compared to the unspecified subgroup (29.6%) and the OLIF L2-5 with posterior stabilisation subgroup (25.8%). Similarly, for major complications, the stand-alone subgroup had the lowest prevalence (1.4%), while the OLIF L2-5 with posterior stabilisation subgroup (1.8%) and the unspecified OLIF L2-5 subgroup (1.6%) had higher rates. However, the differences were not statistically significant. In conclusion, the rate of major complications after OLIF is minimal, making it a safe procedure with significant benefits outweighing the risks. The advantages of OLIF L2-5 with posterior stabilisation over stand-alone OLIF L2-5 is a subject of discussion.
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
10
期刊最新文献
Increased Postoperative Glycemic Variability Is Associated with Increased Revision Surgery Rates in Diabetic Patients Undergoing Hip Fracture Fixation Simultaneous Laparoscopic Surgery for Esophageal Achalasia Combined with Epiphrenic Diverticulum: A Case Report Modified Tension Band Wiring Using Only Non-Absorbable Braided Polyblend Sutures for the Treatment of Patellar Fractures The Method of 3D C-arm Navigated AC Joint Stabilization-Surgical Technique Locoregional vs. General Anaesthesia for Minimally Invasive Video-Assisted Parathyroidectomy (MIVAP) Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis: A Feasibility Study
×
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学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
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