-
Meta Analysis
Unilateral biportal endoscopy versus microscopic decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: A meta-analysis.
- Huaqiang Zhou, Xuhua Wang, Zhaoyuan Chen, Wuyang Liu, and Jiaquan Luo.
- Department of Spine Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou, P. R. China.
- Medicine (Baltimore). 2023 Apr 7; 102 (14): e32756e32756.
BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate whether there is a superior clinical effect of unilateral biportal endoscopy compared with microscopic decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.MethodsWe searched CNKI, WANFANG, CQVIP, CBM, PubMed, and Web of Science up to January 2022, and selected studies that met our inclusion criteria.ResultsThe results of this meta-analysis indicated that unilateral biportal endoscopy was demonstrated to be more beneficial for patients compared with microscopic decompression for the following outcomes: Operation time [standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.943, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-1.856, -0.031), P = .043], hospital stays [SMD = -2.652, 95% CI (-4.390, -0.914), P = .003], EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire [SMD = 0.354, 95% CI (0.070, 0.638), P = .014], back pain visual analogue score [SMD = -0.506, 95% CI (-0.861, -0.151), P = .005], leg pain visual analogue score [SMD = -0.241, 95% CI (-0.371, -.0112), P = .000], the C-reactive protein level [SMD = -1.492,95% CI (-2.432, -0.552), P = .002]. Other outcomes demonstrated no significant differences between the 2 groups.ConclusionFor patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, unilateral biportal endoscopy was found to be more superior than microscopic decompression in terms of operation time, hospital stays, EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire, back visual analogue score, leg visual analogue score and the C-reactive protein level. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in other outcome indicators.Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?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.
.