• Int J Surg · Apr 2017

    Review Meta Analysis Comparative Study

    Decompression and coflex interlaminar stabilisation compared with conventional surgical procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

    • Ai-Min Li, Xiang Li, and Zhong Yang.
    • Department of Orthopedics, The 5th Central Hospital of Tianjin, China. Electronic address: liam1986@126.com.
    • Int J Surg. 2017 Apr 1; 40: 60-67.

    BackgroundDecompression plus spinal fusion is one of the most common surgeries for the treatment of degenerative spine disease in older adults. However, complications caused by fusion surgery have been reported in some studies. Recently published studies have reported that coflex is a safe and viable option in the selection of instrumentation for spinal stabilisation. Our meta-analysis was conducted to investigate whether decompression and coflex results in better performance for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) patients when compared with decompression and fusion surgery.MethodWeb of Science, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched. Ten studies that compared coflex with fusion surgery were included in our meta-analysis. The PRISMA guidelines and Cochrane Handbook were applied to assess the quality of the results published in all included studies to ensure that the results of our meta-analysis were reliable and veritable.ResultsThe results of our meta-analysis showed that decompression and coflex was more effective than the control procedure in terms of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), length of hospital stay (LOS) and blood loss. However, no significant difference was found in visual analogue scale (VAS) and major device-related complications.ConclusionsCompared with conventional decompression plus fusion surgery, coflex was not inferior in terms of functional clinical outcomes, including ODI and VAS pain score. Moreover, coflex showed less blood loss, shorter LOS and similar device-related complications compared to decompression plus fusion surgery. Therefore, the coflex interlaminar stabilisation device was found to be safe and effective compared to decompression plus fusion for the treatment of LSS.Copyright © 2017 IJS Publishing Group Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Free 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…