Wallis与Coflex两种棘突间动态稳定系统修复腰椎退行性疾病的Meta分析

发布时间：2018-12-16 13:29

【摘要】：背景:Wallis与Coflex两种棘突间动态稳定系统对比治疗腰椎退行性疾病孰优孰劣一直存在争议。目的:系统评价Wallis与Coflex两种棘突间动态稳定系统修复腰椎退行性疾病的有效性与安全性。方法:计算机检索2016-08-01以前Pub Med、Embase、Medline、Cochrane图书馆、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、相关期刊论文(CNKI)、万方数据库(Wanfang Database)、维普中文科技期刊数据库(VIP)关于Wallis与Coflex两种棘突间动态稳定系统对比治疗腰椎退行性疾病的文献,纳入文献的方法学质量采用MINORS量表评价,数据通过Review Manager 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果与结论:(1)共纳入6篇文献,均为非随机对照试验;(2)结局指标中日本骨科学会评分、Oswestry残障指数、目测类比评分、Prolo腰椎功能评分、手术节段前凸角、手术节段活动度2种术式比较差异无显著性意义;Wallis组的不良事件发生率显著低于Conflex组(P0.05);(3)结果提示,Wallis与Coflex在早中期随访当中两者临床有效性无明显差异,但在临床安全性方面Wallis较Coflex更具优势。
[Abstract]:Background: the comparison of Wallis and Coflex in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases has been controversial. Objective: to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Wallis and Coflex in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. Methods: Pub Med,Embase,Medline,Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China Journal Full-text Database, (CNKI), Wanfang Database, (Wanfang Database), were searched by computer before 2016-08-01. The literature on dynamic stabilization system between Wallis and Coflex in the Chinese scientific and technological journal database (VIP) was compared with that in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. The methodological quality of the literature was evaluated with MINORS scale. The data were analyzed by Meta with Review Manager 5.3 software. Results and conclusions: (1) A total of 6 articles were included, all of which were non-randomized controlled trials; (2) there was no significant difference in the score of Japanese orthopedic society, Oswestry disability index, visual analogue score, Prolo lumbar spine function score, segmental kyphosis angle and segmental motion. The incidence of adverse events in Wallis group was significantly lower than that in Conflex group (P0.05); (3). The results showed that there was no significant difference in clinical efficacy between Wallis and Coflex in early and medium-term follow-up, but Wallis had more advantages than Coflex in clinical safety.
【作者单位】：北京中医药大学东直门医院骨科;北京中日友好医院骨科;
【分类号】：R681.53

【相似文献】