Abdulrahman O. Al-Naseem MB ChB (Hons), MSc , Yusuf Mehkri MD , Sachiv Chakravarti MD , Eli Johnson MD , Margot Kelly-Hedrick MD , Cathleen Kuo MD , Melissa Erickson MD, MBA , Khoi D. Than MD , Brett Rocos MD, BSc (Hons), MB, ChB , Deb Bhowmick MD , Christopher I. Shaffrey MD , Norah Foster MD , Ali Baaj MD , Nader Dahdaleh MD , C. Rory Goodwin MD, PhD , Theresa L. Williamson MD , Yi Lu MD, PhD , Muhammad M. Abd-El-Barr MD, PhD
{"title":"无神经损伤的创伤性胸腰椎骨折的开放、经皮和经皮方法的术中和术后效果比较:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Abdulrahman O. Al-Naseem MB ChB (Hons), MSc , Yusuf Mehkri MD , Sachiv Chakravarti MD , Eli Johnson MD , Margot Kelly-Hedrick MD , Cathleen Kuo MD , Melissa Erickson MD, MBA , Khoi D. Than MD , Brett Rocos MD, BSc (Hons), MB, ChB , Deb Bhowmick MD , Christopher I. Shaffrey MD , Norah Foster MD , Ali Baaj MD , Nader Dahdaleh MD , C. Rory Goodwin MD, PhD , Theresa L. Williamson MD , Yi Lu MD, PhD , Muhammad M. Abd-El-Barr MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.xnsj.2024.100547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Traumatic thoracolumbar fracture fixation without neurological injury can be performed using the traditional open, mini-open Wiltse, and percutaneous approaches. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare perioperative outcomes between these approaches.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for all relevant observational comparative studies.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>5 randomized trials and 22 comparative cohort studies were included. Compared to the traditional open approach (n=959), the Wiltse approach (n=410) was associated with significantly lower operative time, intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL), and length of stay (LOS). There was no significant difference between the two in terms of postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) and Cobb angle. Compared to the percutaneous approach (n=980), the Wiltse approach was associated with shorter operative and fluoroscopy time, as well as significantly improved Cobb and vertebral body angles. The percutaneous approach was associated with improved vertebral body height. There was no significant difference between the two for blood loss, postoperative VAS, or LOS. Compared to the traditional open approach, the percutaneous approach was associated with shorter operative time, lower EBL, shorter LOS and better postoperative VAS and Oswestry Disability Index. There was no difference between the two in postoperative Cobb angle, vertebral angle, or vertebral body height. Overall study heterogeneity was high.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Utilization of minimally invasive surgical approaches holds great promise for lowering patient morbidity and optimizing care. A prospective trial is needed to assess outcomes and guide surgical decision making.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34622,"journal":{"name":"North American Spine Society Journal","volume":"20 ","pages":"Article 100547"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666548424002403/pdfft?md5=90aa4b9663d58160d2f6e10f23e30dcd&pid=1-s2.0-S2666548424002403-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between open, wiltse, and percutaneous approach to traumatic thoracolumbar spine fractures without neurological injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Abdulrahman O. Al-Naseem MB ChB (Hons), MSc , Yusuf Mehkri MD , Sachiv Chakravarti MD , Eli Johnson MD , Margot Kelly-Hedrick MD , Cathleen Kuo MD , Melissa Erickson MD, MBA , Khoi D. Than MD , Brett Rocos MD, BSc (Hons), MB, ChB , Deb Bhowmick MD , Christopher I. Shaffrey MD , Norah Foster MD , Ali Baaj MD , Nader Dahdaleh MD , C. Rory Goodwin MD, PhD , Theresa L. Williamson MD , Yi Lu MD, PhD , Muhammad M. Abd-El-Barr MD, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.xnsj.2024.100547\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Traumatic thoracolumbar fracture fixation without neurological injury can be performed using the traditional open, mini-open Wiltse, and percutaneous approaches. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare perioperative outcomes between these approaches.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for all relevant observational comparative studies.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>5 randomized trials and 22 comparative cohort studies were included. Compared to the traditional open approach (n=959), the Wiltse approach (n=410) was associated with significantly lower operative time, intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL), and length of stay (LOS). There was no significant difference between the two in terms of postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) and Cobb angle. Compared to the percutaneous approach (n=980), the Wiltse approach was associated with shorter operative and fluoroscopy time, as well as significantly improved Cobb and vertebral body angles. The percutaneous approach was associated with improved vertebral body height. There was no significant difference between the two for blood loss, postoperative VAS, or LOS. Compared to the traditional open approach, the percutaneous approach was associated with shorter operative time, lower EBL, shorter LOS and better postoperative VAS and Oswestry Disability Index. There was no difference between the two in postoperative Cobb angle, vertebral angle, or vertebral body height. Overall study heterogeneity was high.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Utilization of minimally invasive surgical approaches holds great promise for lowering patient morbidity and optimizing care. A prospective trial is needed to assess outcomes and guide surgical decision making.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34622,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"North American Spine Society Journal\",\"volume\":\"20 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100547\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666548424002403/pdfft?md5=90aa4b9663d58160d2f6e10f23e30dcd&pid=1-s2.0-S2666548424002403-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"North American Spine Society Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666548424002403\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"North American Spine Society Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666548424002403","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景无神经损伤的创伤性胸腰椎骨折固定术可采用传统的开放、小开放 Wiltse 和经皮方法。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在比较这些方法的围手术期疗效。方法检索了PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus、Embase和Cochrane图书馆的所有相关观察比较研究。与传统的开放式方法(959 例)相比,Wiltse 方法(410 例)的手术时间、术中估计失血量(EBL)和住院时间(LOS)均显著缩短。两者在术后视觉模拟量表(VAS)和Cobb角方面没有明显差异。与经皮方法(980 人)相比,Wiltse 方法的手术时间和透视时间更短,Cobb 角和椎体角也明显改善。经皮方法可改善椎体高度。两者在失血量、术后 VAS 或 LOS 方面没有明显差异。与传统的开放式方法相比,经皮方法的手术时间更短、EBL更低、LOS更短、术后VAS和Oswestry残疾指数更好。两者在术后Cobb角、椎体角或椎体高度方面没有差异。结论微创手术方法的应用为降低患者发病率和优化护理带来了巨大希望。需要进行前瞻性试验来评估结果并指导手术决策。
Comparison of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between open, wiltse, and percutaneous approach to traumatic thoracolumbar spine fractures without neurological injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Background
Traumatic thoracolumbar fracture fixation without neurological injury can be performed using the traditional open, mini-open Wiltse, and percutaneous approaches. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare perioperative outcomes between these approaches.
Methods
PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for all relevant observational comparative studies.
Results
5 randomized trials and 22 comparative cohort studies were included. Compared to the traditional open approach (n=959), the Wiltse approach (n=410) was associated with significantly lower operative time, intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL), and length of stay (LOS). There was no significant difference between the two in terms of postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) and Cobb angle. Compared to the percutaneous approach (n=980), the Wiltse approach was associated with shorter operative and fluoroscopy time, as well as significantly improved Cobb and vertebral body angles. The percutaneous approach was associated with improved vertebral body height. There was no significant difference between the two for blood loss, postoperative VAS, or LOS. Compared to the traditional open approach, the percutaneous approach was associated with shorter operative time, lower EBL, shorter LOS and better postoperative VAS and Oswestry Disability Index. There was no difference between the two in postoperative Cobb angle, vertebral angle, or vertebral body height. Overall study heterogeneity was high.
Conclusions
Utilization of minimally invasive surgical approaches holds great promise for lowering patient morbidity and optimizing care. A prospective trial is needed to assess outcomes and guide surgical decision making.