在脊柱融合手术中使用自体细胞和移植物替代物的疗效:临床结果和成像特征的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS JOR Spine Pub Date : 2024-06-28 DOI:10.1002/jsp2.1347
F. Salamanna, D. Contartese, G. Tedesco, A. Ruffilli, M. Manzetti, G. Viroli, M. Traversari, C. Faldini, G. Giavaresi
{"title":"在脊柱融合手术中使用自体细胞和移植物替代物的疗效:临床结果和成像特征的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"F. Salamanna,&nbsp;D. Contartese,&nbsp;G. Tedesco,&nbsp;A. Ruffilli,&nbsp;M. Manzetti,&nbsp;G. Viroli,&nbsp;M. Traversari,&nbsp;C. Faldini,&nbsp;G. Giavaresi","doi":"10.1002/jsp2.1347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Over the past several decades, there has been a notable increase in the total number of spinal fusion procedures worldwide. Advanced spinal fusion techniques, surgical approaches, and new alternatives in grafting materials and implants, as well as autologous cellular therapies, have been widely employed for treating spinal diseases. While the potential of cellular therapies to yield better clinical results is appealing, supportive data are needed to confirm this claim. This meta-analysis aims to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes between graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies and graft substitutes alone. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for studies comparing graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies and graft substitutes alone up to February 2024. The risk of bias of the included studies was evaluated using the Downs and Black checklist. The following outcomes were extracted for comparison: fusion success, complications/adverse events, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. Thirteen studies involving 836 patients were included, with 7 studies considered for the meta-analysis. Results indicated that the use of graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies demonstrated higher fusion success rates at 3, 6, and 12 months, lower VAS score at 6 months, and lower ODI score at 3, 6, and 12 months. The complication rate was similar between graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies and graft substitutes alone. Although the current literature remains limited, this meta-analysis suggests that the incorporation of cellular therapies such as bone marrow and platelet derivatives with graft substitutes is associated with a higher fusion rate and significant improvements in functional status and pain following spinal fusion. Future well-designed randomized clinical trials are needed to definitively assess the clinical effectiveness of cellular therapies in spinal fusion.</p>","PeriodicalId":14876,"journal":{"name":"JOR Spine","volume":"7 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11212337/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of using autologous cells with graft substitutes for spinal fusion surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and imaging features\",\"authors\":\"F. Salamanna,&nbsp;D. Contartese,&nbsp;G. Tedesco,&nbsp;A. Ruffilli,&nbsp;M. Manzetti,&nbsp;G. Viroli,&nbsp;M. Traversari,&nbsp;C. Faldini,&nbsp;G. Giavaresi\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jsp2.1347\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Over the past several decades, there has been a notable increase in the total number of spinal fusion procedures worldwide. Advanced spinal fusion techniques, surgical approaches, and new alternatives in grafting materials and implants, as well as autologous cellular therapies, have been widely employed for treating spinal diseases. While the potential of cellular therapies to yield better clinical results is appealing, supportive data are needed to confirm this claim. This meta-analysis aims to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes between graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies and graft substitutes alone. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for studies comparing graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies and graft substitutes alone up to February 2024. The risk of bias of the included studies was evaluated using the Downs and Black checklist. The following outcomes were extracted for comparison: fusion success, complications/adverse events, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. Thirteen studies involving 836 patients were included, with 7 studies considered for the meta-analysis. Results indicated that the use of graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies demonstrated higher fusion success rates at 3, 6, and 12 months, lower VAS score at 6 months, and lower ODI score at 3, 6, and 12 months. The complication rate was similar between graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies and graft substitutes alone. Although the current literature remains limited, this meta-analysis suggests that the incorporation of cellular therapies such as bone marrow and platelet derivatives with graft substitutes is associated with a higher fusion rate and significant improvements in functional status and pain following spinal fusion. Future well-designed randomized clinical trials are needed to definitively assess the clinical effectiveness of cellular therapies in spinal fusion.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14876,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOR Spine\",\"volume\":\"7 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11212337/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOR Spine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jsp2.1347\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOR Spine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jsp2.1347","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

过去几十年来,全球脊柱融合手术的总数显著增加。先进的脊柱融合技术、手术方法、新的移植材料和植入物以及自体细胞疗法已被广泛用于治疗脊柱疾病。虽然细胞疗法有可能产生更好的临床效果,但这一说法需要支持性数据来证实。本荟萃分析旨在比较移植物替代物与自体细胞疗法和单纯移植物替代物之间的放射学和临床效果。截至 2024 年 2 月,我们在 PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science、ClinicalTrials.gov 和 Cochrane 对照试验中央注册中心检索了比较移植物替代物与自体细胞疗法和单纯移植物替代物的研究。采用Downs和Black核对表对纳入研究的偏倚风险进行了评估。提取了以下结果进行比较:融合成功率、并发症/不良事件、视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分和Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评分。共纳入 13 项研究,涉及 836 名患者,其中 7 项研究被纳入荟萃分析。结果表明,使用移植物替代物与自体细胞疗法在3、6和12个月时的融合成功率更高,6个月时的VAS评分更低,3、6和12个月时的ODI评分更低。伴有自体细胞疗法的移植物替代物与单纯移植物替代物的并发症发生率相似。尽管目前的文献仍然有限,但这项荟萃分析表明,在移植物替代物中加入骨髓和血小板衍生物等细胞疗法与更高的融合率以及脊柱融合术后功能状态和疼痛的显著改善有关。未来还需要进行精心设计的随机临床试验,以明确评估细胞疗法在脊柱融合术中的临床效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Efficacy of using autologous cells with graft substitutes for spinal fusion surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and imaging features

Over the past several decades, there has been a notable increase in the total number of spinal fusion procedures worldwide. Advanced spinal fusion techniques, surgical approaches, and new alternatives in grafting materials and implants, as well as autologous cellular therapies, have been widely employed for treating spinal diseases. While the potential of cellular therapies to yield better clinical results is appealing, supportive data are needed to confirm this claim. This meta-analysis aims to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes between graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies and graft substitutes alone. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for studies comparing graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies and graft substitutes alone up to February 2024. The risk of bias of the included studies was evaluated using the Downs and Black checklist. The following outcomes were extracted for comparison: fusion success, complications/adverse events, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. Thirteen studies involving 836 patients were included, with 7 studies considered for the meta-analysis. Results indicated that the use of graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies demonstrated higher fusion success rates at 3, 6, and 12 months, lower VAS score at 6 months, and lower ODI score at 3, 6, and 12 months. The complication rate was similar between graft substitutes with autologous cell therapies and graft substitutes alone. Although the current literature remains limited, this meta-analysis suggests that the incorporation of cellular therapies such as bone marrow and platelet derivatives with graft substitutes is associated with a higher fusion rate and significant improvements in functional status and pain following spinal fusion. Future well-designed randomized clinical trials are needed to definitively assess the clinical effectiveness of cellular therapies in spinal fusion.

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
JOR Spine
JOR Spine ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
18.90%
发文量
42
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
The effects of extracellular matrix-degrading enzymes polymorphisms on intervertebral disc degeneration Effect of cigarette smoke exposure and cessation on regional diffusion properties in rat intervertebral discs Pharmacokinetics of PP353, a formulation of linezolid for intervertebral disc administration, in patients with chronic low back pain and Modic change Type 1: A first-in-human, Phase 1b, open-label, single-dose study Preclinical development and characterisation of PP353, a formulation of linezolid for intradiscal administration Melatonin attenuates degenerative disc degression by downregulating DLX5 via the TGF/Smad2/3 pathway in nucleus pulposus cells
×
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