Efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopy compared with microscopic decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and updated meta-analysis

被引:1
|
作者
Wang, Yue-Peng [1 ,2 ]
Qin, Shi-Lei [3 ]
Yang, Su [1 ]
Xu, Yun-Feng [3 ]
Han, Peng-Fei [1 ]
机构
[1] Changzhi Med Coll, Heping Hosp, Dept Orthopaed, 110 South Yanan Rd, Changzhi 046000, Shanxi, Peoples R China
[2] Capital Med Univ, Beijing Friendship Hosp, Pinggu Hosp, Dept Orthopaed, Beijing 101200, Peoples R China
[3] Changzhi Yunfeng Hosp, Dept Orthopaed, 10 Yunbu St, Changzhi 046000, Shanxi, Peoples R China
关键词
unilateral biportal endoscopic; microscopic decompression; lumbar spinal stenosis; surgery; TRADITIONAL OPEN; LAMINECTOMY; SURGERY;
D O I
10.3892/etm.2023.12008
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
The incidence of lumbar spinal stenosis is increasing annually, and with an ever-aging population and longer life expectancies, this trend will further continue. It is hoped that a more effective treatment can be found so that the patients can be relieved of their pain. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic surgery (UBE) and microscopic decompression surgery (MD) for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. A literature search of related studies published until April 2022 was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, , Google Scholar, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and other databases. After filtering of references, 12 eligible studies were identified that compared UBE with MD as a treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. Data were extracted and analysed using R. A total of 12 articles (four randomized controlled and eight cohort studies) were included, with a total of 1,067 patients: 250 men and 249 women in the UBE group and 290 men and 278 women in the MD group. The meta-analysis showed that the mean intraoperative blood loss in the UBE group [standardized mean difference (SMD)=-2.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-3.97, -0.23), P=0.03] was lower than that in the MD group. The postoperative Visual analogue scale (VAS) score for back pain [SMD=-0.52, 95% CI (-0.76, -0.27), P<0.01], leg pain [SMD=-0.30, 95% CI (-0.51, -0.08), P<0.01], postoperative Oswestry disability index [(ODI); SMD=-0.25, 95% CI (-0.48, -0.03), P=0.03], and postoperative C-reactive protein [(CRP); odds ratio (OR)=-0.92, 95% CI (-1.80, 0.03), P=0.04] were lower than those in the MD group. Complications (OR=0.60, 95% CI (0.37, 0.98), P=0.04) and hospital stay (SMD=-1.84, 95% CI (-2.85, 0.83), P <0.01] were also lesser in the UBE group than in the MD group. UBE was preferable to that in the MD group according to the modified MacNab score [OR=2.28, 95% CI (1.28, 4.06), P<0.01]. No significant differences were observed in the operation times between the groups. UBE surgery was found to be a better option for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis than MD surgery.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy versus Microendoscopic Discectomy for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Niu, Yufei
    Shen, Zhen
    Li, Haoyang
    COMPUTATIONAL AND MATHEMATICAL METHODS IN MEDICINE, 2022, 2022
  • [22] Indications for and Outcomes of Three Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Approaches for the Decompression of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review
    Bui, Anh Tuan
    Trinh, Giam Minh
    Wu, Meng-Huang
    Hoang, Tung Thanh
    Hu, Ming-Hsiao
    Pao, Jwo-Luen
    DIAGNOSTICS, 2023, 13 (06)
  • [23] Effect of fusion following decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a meta-analysis and systematic review
    Liang, Lin
    Jiang, Wei-Min
    Li, Xue-Feng
    Wang, Heng
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, 2015, 8 (09): : 14615 - 14624
  • [24] Complications of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-analysis of Single-arm Studies
    Wang, Bin
    He, Peng
    Liu, Xiowei
    Wu, Zhengfang
    Xu, Bin
    ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2023, 15 (01) : 3 - 15
  • [25] Acupotomy for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Kwon, Chan-Young
    Yoon, Sang-hoon
    Lee, Boram
    Leem, Jungtae
    MEDICINE, 2019, 98 (32)
  • [26] Single and multilevel decompression alone in patients with multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Gomes, Fernando Cotrim
    Larcipretti, Anna Laura Lima
    Udoma-Udofa, Ofonime Chantal
    da Mata, Paulo Barrouin
    Bannach, Matheus de Andrade
    NEUROSURGICAL REVIEW, 2025, 48 (01)
  • [27] Decompression and coflex interlaminar stabilisation compared with conventional surgical procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Li, Ai-min
    Li, Xiang
    Yang, Zhong
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2017, 40 : 60 - 67
  • [28] Decompression alone versus decompression with fusion in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Gadjradj, Pravesh Shankar
    Basilious, Mark
    Goldberg, Jacob L. L.
    Sommer, Fabian
    Navarro-Ramirez, Rodrigo
    Mykolajtchuk, Catherine
    Ng, Amanda Z. Z.
    Medary, Branden
    Hussain, Ibrahim
    Haertl, Roger
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2023, 32 (03) : 1054 - 1067
  • [29] Efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopy versus other spine surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zheng, Bin
    Xu, Shuai
    Guo, Chen
    Jin, Linyu
    Liu, Chenjun
    Liu, Haiying
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2022, 9
  • [30] A meta-analysis of clinical effects of microscopic unilateral laminectomy bilateral decompression (ULBD) versus biportal endoscopic ULBD for lumbar canal stenosis
    Lin, Guang-Xun
    Yao, Zhi-Kang
    Xin, Chen
    Kim, Jin-Sung
    Chen, Chien-Min
    Hu, Bao-Shan
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2022, 9