Cargando…

Electrical Stimulation to Enhance Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review

Study Design Systematic review. Clinical Questions Compared with no stimulation, does electrical stimulation promote bone fusion after lumbar spinal fusion procedures? Does the effect differ based on the type of electrical stimulation used? Methods Electronic databases and reference lists of key art...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, Paul, Lau, Darryl, Brodt, Erika D., Dettori, Joseph R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4174185/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25278882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1386752
_version_ 1782336320992968704
author Park, Paul
Lau, Darryl
Brodt, Erika D.
Dettori, Joseph R.
author_facet Park, Paul
Lau, Darryl
Brodt, Erika D.
Dettori, Joseph R.
author_sort Park, Paul
collection PubMed
description Study Design Systematic review. Clinical Questions Compared with no stimulation, does electrical stimulation promote bone fusion after lumbar spinal fusion procedures? Does the effect differ based on the type of electrical stimulation used? Methods Electronic databases and reference lists of key articles were searched up to October 15, 2013, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of electrical stimulation to no electrical stimulation on fusion rates after lumbar spinal fusion for the treatment of degenerative disease. Two independent reviewers assessed the strength of evidence using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Results Six RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The following types of electrical stimulation were investigated: direct current (three studies), pulsed electromagnetic field (three studies), and capacitive coupling (one study). The control groups consisted of no stimulation (two studies) or placebo (four studies). Marked heterogeneity in study populations, characteristics, and design prevented a meta-analysis. Regardless of the type of electrical stimulation used, cumulative incidences of fusion varied widely across the RCTs, ranging from 35.4 to 90.6% in the intervention groups and from 33.3 to 81.9% in the control groups across 9 to 24 months of follow-up. Similarly, when stratified by the type of electrical stimulation used, fusion outcomes from individual studies varied, leading to inconsistent and conflicting results. Conclusion Given the inconsistency in study results, possibly due to heterogeneity in study populations/characteristics and quality, we are unable to conclude that electrical stimulation results in better fusion outcomes compared with no stimulation. The overall strength of evidence for the conclusions is low.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4174185
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41741852015-10-01 Electrical Stimulation to Enhance Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review Park, Paul Lau, Darryl Brodt, Erika D. Dettori, Joseph R. Evid Based Spine Care J Article Study Design Systematic review. Clinical Questions Compared with no stimulation, does electrical stimulation promote bone fusion after lumbar spinal fusion procedures? Does the effect differ based on the type of electrical stimulation used? Methods Electronic databases and reference lists of key articles were searched up to October 15, 2013, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of electrical stimulation to no electrical stimulation on fusion rates after lumbar spinal fusion for the treatment of degenerative disease. Two independent reviewers assessed the strength of evidence using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Results Six RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The following types of electrical stimulation were investigated: direct current (three studies), pulsed electromagnetic field (three studies), and capacitive coupling (one study). The control groups consisted of no stimulation (two studies) or placebo (four studies). Marked heterogeneity in study populations, characteristics, and design prevented a meta-analysis. Regardless of the type of electrical stimulation used, cumulative incidences of fusion varied widely across the RCTs, ranging from 35.4 to 90.6% in the intervention groups and from 33.3 to 81.9% in the control groups across 9 to 24 months of follow-up. Similarly, when stratified by the type of electrical stimulation used, fusion outcomes from individual studies varied, leading to inconsistent and conflicting results. Conclusion Given the inconsistency in study results, possibly due to heterogeneity in study populations/characteristics and quality, we are unable to conclude that electrical stimulation results in better fusion outcomes compared with no stimulation. The overall strength of evidence for the conclusions is low. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2014-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4174185/ /pubmed/25278882 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1386752 Text en © Thieme Medical Publishers
spellingShingle Article
Park, Paul
Lau, Darryl
Brodt, Erika D.
Dettori, Joseph R.
Electrical Stimulation to Enhance Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review
title Electrical Stimulation to Enhance Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review
title_full Electrical Stimulation to Enhance Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Electrical Stimulation to Enhance Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Electrical Stimulation to Enhance Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review
title_short Electrical Stimulation to Enhance Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review
title_sort electrical stimulation to enhance spinal fusion: a systematic review
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4174185/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25278882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1386752
work_keys_str_mv AT parkpaul electricalstimulationtoenhancespinalfusionasystematicreview
AT laudarryl electricalstimulationtoenhancespinalfusionasystematicreview
AT brodterikad electricalstimulationtoenhancespinalfusionasystematicreview
AT dettorijosephr electricalstimulationtoenhancespinalfusionasystematicreview