• World Neurosurg · Jul 2021

    Meta Analysis

    Expandable versus Static Cages in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

    • Paola Calvachi-Prieto, Malia B McAvoy, Christian D Cerecedo-Lopez, Yi Lu, John H Chi, Linda S Aglio, Timothy R Smith, William B Gormley, Michael W Groff, Rania A Mekary, and Hasan A Zaidi.
    • Department of Neurosurgery, Computational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
    • World Neurosurg. 2021 Jul 1; 151: e607-e614.

    BackgroundExpandable cages for interbody fusion allow for in situ expansion optimizing fit while mitigating endplate damage. Studies comparing outcomes after using expandable or static cages have been conflicting.MethodsThis was a meta-analysis A systematic search was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines identifying studies reporting outcomes among patients who underwent minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-LIF).ResultsFourteen articles with 1129 patients met inclusion criteria. Compared with MIS-LIFs performed with static cages, those with expandable cages had a significantly lower incidence of graft subsidence (expandable: incidence 0.03, I2 22.50%; static: incidence 0.27, I2 51.03%, P interaction <0.001), length of hospital stay (expandable: mean difference [MD] 3.55 days, I2 97%; static: MD 7.1 days, I2 97%, P interaction <0.01), and a greater increase in disc height (expandable: MD -4.41 mm, I2 99.56%; static: MD -0.79 mm, I2 99.17%, P interaction = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference among Oswestry Disability Index (expandable: MD -22.75, I2 98.17%; static: MD -17.11, I2 95.26%, P interaction = 0.15), fusion rate (expandable: incidence 0.94, I2 0%; static incidence 0.92, I2 0%, P interaction = 0.44), overall change in lumbar lordosis (expandable: MD 3.48 degrees, I2 59.29%; static: MD 3.67 degrees, I2 0.00%, P interaction 0.88), blood loss (expandable: MD 228.9 mL, I2 100%; static: MD 261.1 mL, I2 94%, P interaction = 0.69) and operative time (expandable: MD 184 minutes, I2 95.32%; static: MD 150.4 minutes, I2 91%, P interaction = 0.56).ConclusionsExpandable interbody cages in MIS-LIF were associated with a decrease in subsidence rate, operative time and greater in increase in disc height.Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      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…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.