• Eur Spine J · Feb 2016

    Review Meta Analysis Comparative Study

    Comparison of combined anterior-posterior approach versus posterior-only approach in treating adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a meta-analysis.

    • Zihao Chen and Limin Rong.
    • Department of Spine Surgery, Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, No. 600, Tianhe Road, Guangzhou, 510630, China.
    • Eur Spine J. 2016 Feb 1; 25 (2): 363-71.

    PurposeChoosing a surgical approach to treat adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is still controversial. To compare the effectiveness and safety of combined anterior-posterior approach to posterior-only approach, we conducted a meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched electronic database for relevant studies that compared anterior-posterior approach with posterior approach in AIS. Then data extraction and quality assessment were conducted. We used RevMan 5.1 for data analysis. A random effects model was used for heterogeneous data, while a fixed effect model was used for homogeneous data.ResultsA total of ten non-randomized controlled studies involving 872 patients were included. There was no significant difference in Cobb angle (95 % CI -0.33 to 4.91, P = 0.09) and percent-predicted FEV1 (95 % CI -6.79 to 4.54, P = 0.70) between the two groups. In subgroup analysis, the kyphosis angle correction was significantly higher than posterior group in severe subgroup (95 % CI 0.72-6.50, P = 0.01), while no significant difference was found in no-restriction subgroup (95 % CI -2.75 to 5.42, P = 0.52). Patients in posterior group obtained a better percent-predicted FVC than those in anterior-posterior group (95 % CI -13.18 to -4.74, P < 0.0001). Significant less complication rate (95 % CI 2.75-17.49, P < 0.0001), blood loss (95 % CI 363.28-658.91, P < 0.00001), operative time (95 % CI 2.65-3.45, P < 0.00001) and length of hospital stay (95 % CI 1.98-22.94, P = 0.02) were found in posterior group.ConclusionsPosterior-only approach can achieve similar coronal plane correction and percent-predicted FEV1 compared to combined anterior-posterior approach. The posterior approach even does better in sagittal correction in severe AIS patients. Significantly less complication rate, blood loss, operative time, length of hospital stay and better percent-predicted FVC are also achieved by posterior-only approach. Posterior-only approach seems to be effective and safe in treating AIS for experienced surgeons.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…