Clinical efficacy of oblique lateral interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases: a Meta-analysis
庞瑶,范云鹏,李茂强,侯长举,朱六龙
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn101202-20190524-00172
2020-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To compare the clinical efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases.Methods:Reports were used case-control studies and randomized clinical trials to compare the oblique lumbar interbody fusion with posterior approach interbody fusion were retried from China National Knowledge Internet, Wanfang Data, Weipu Data, PubMed Library, and Cochrane Library, from January 2010 to September 2019. The searched key words were "斜外侧椎间融合术" "后入路椎间融合术" and "oblique lumbar interbody fusion" "oblique lateral interbody fusion" "anterior to psoas" "posterior lumbar interbody fusion" . Methodological quality of the trials was critically assessed. Statistical software Revman 5.3 was used for data analysis, and average operation time, average blood loss, average length of hospital stays, VAS, ODI, IDH, LL, and complications were analysis.Results:A total of 580 patients from 10 articles were included, 276 patients using OLIF and 304 patients using PLIF. One randomized controlled trial was low risk evaluated by Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias assessment tool, and six cases controlled trials were high quality and three cases controlled trials were middle high quality evaluated by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale risk of bias assessment tool. The results showed that, when the efficacy of OLIF and PLIF were compared, there was statistical significance in the average operation time(
WMD=-84.02, 95%
CI -118.29 to -49.74,
P<0.01), average blood loss(
WMD=-269.12, 95%
CI -319.84 to -218.41,
P<0.01), average length of hospital stays(
WMD=-3.29, 95%
CI -4.70 to -1.89,
P<0.01), IDH(
WMD=1.11, 95%
CI 0.44 to 1.77,
P<0.01). However, there was no statistical significance in ODI post operation(
WMD=0.16, 95%
CI -1.98 to 2.30,
P>0.05), VAS post operation(
WMD=0.02, 95%
CI -0.52 to 0.56,
P>0.05), LL(
WMD=0.77, 95%
CI -0.40 to 1.94,
P>0.05), complications(
OR=0.91, 95%
CI 0.50 to 1.64,
P>0.05).
Conclusions:Both approaches achieve similar and satisfactory clinical effect in the interbody fusion. However, OLIF has a greater advantage in terms of operation time, blood loss, length of hospital stays, IDH.