Cargando…

Deformity Correction with Interbody Fusion Using Lateral versus Posterior Approach in Adult Degenerative Scoliosis: A Systematic Review and Observational Meta-analysis

This study was designed to systematically review and meta-analyze the functional and radiological outcomes between lateral and posterior approaches in adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS). Both lateral (lumbar, extreme, and oblique) and posterior interbody fusion (posterior lumbar and transforaminal)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mittal, Samarth, Sudhakar, Pudipeddi Venkata, Ahuja, Kaustubh, Ifthekar, Syed, Yadav, Gagandeep, Sinha, Shivendra, Goyal, Nikhil, Verma, Vishal, Sarkar, Bhaskar, Kandwal, Pankaj
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Society of Spine Surgery 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10151641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36642969
http://dx.doi.org/10.31616/asj.2022.0040
Descripción
Sumario:This study was designed to systematically review and meta-analyze the functional and radiological outcomes between lateral and posterior approaches in adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS). Both lateral (lumbar, extreme, and oblique) and posterior interbody fusion (posterior lumbar and transforaminal) are used for deformity correction in patients with ADS with unclear comparison in this cohort of patients in the existing literature. A literature search using three electronic databases was performed to identify studies that reported outcomes of lateral (group L) and posterior interbody fusion (group P) in patients with ADS with curves of 10°–40°. Group P was further subdivided into minimally invasive surgery (MIS-P) and open posterior (Op-P) subgroups. Data on functional, radiological, and operative outcomes, length of hospital stay (LOHS), fusion rates, and complications were extracted and meta-analyzed using the random-effects model. A total of 18 studies (732 patients) met the inclusion criteria. No significant difference was found in functional and radiological outcomes between the two groups on data pooling. Total operative time in the MIS-P subgroup was less than that of group L (233.86 minutes vs. 401 minutes, p<0.05). The total blood loss in group L was less than that in the Op-P subgroup(477 mL vs. 1,325.6 mL, p<0.05). Group L had significantly less LOHS than the Op-P subgroup (4.15 days vs. 13.5 days, p<0.05). No significant difference was seen in fusion rates, but complications were seen except for transient sensorimotor weakness (group L: 24.3%, group P: 5.6%; p<0.05). Complications, such as postoperative thigh pain (7.7%), visceral injuries (2%), and retrograde ejaculation (3.7%), were seen only in group L while adjacent segment degeneration was seen only in group P (8.6%). Lateral approach has an advantage in blood loss and LOHS over the Op-P subgroup. The MIS-P subgroup has less operative time than group L, but with comparable blood loss and LOHS. No significant difference was found in functional, radiological, fusion rates, pseudoarthrosis, and complications, except for transient sensorimotor deficits. Few complications were approach-specific in each group.