S Ji1, Q Shao1, Y Wang1, J Liu1. 1. Department of Emergency Trauma Surgery, East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: The pooled data were analyzed using RevMan 5.2 software. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to compare the efficacy of minimally invasive and conventional surgery for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) in Chinese Han population. SETTING: China. METHODS: An electronic search up to November 2013 was performed to retrieve all relevant articles. The overall standardized mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes and odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous variables as well as their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to compare the efficacy of minimally invasive and conventional surgery. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies involving 1913 patients treated by minimally invasive surgery and 2295 patients treated by conversational surgery were included in this meta-analysis. The overall estimate indicated that minimally invasive surgery could significantly decrease the hospitalization time (SMD = -2.03, 95% CI, -2.49 to 1.56, P < 0.0001), blood loss (SMD = -2.65, 95% CI -3.33 to 1.97, P < 0.0001), incision length (SMD = -3.57, 95% CI, -4.39 to 2.75, P < 0.0001), recurrence rate (odds ratio (OR) = 0.22, 95 CI: 0.08-0.60, P = 0.003) and complications (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.25-0.92, P = 0.03) and increase the postoperative excellent rate (OR = 1.82, 95% CI, 1.44-2.31, P < 0.0001) compared with conventional surgery. In addition, the pooled data showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the operative time (SMD = -0.58, 95% CI, -1.32 to 0.15, P = 0.12) between LDH patients treated by minimally invasive and conventional surgery. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, minimally invasive surgery was a more safe and effective treatment for treating LDH in Chinese Han population when compared with conventional surgery.
STUDY DESIGN: The pooled data were analyzed using RevMan 5.2 software. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to compare the efficacy of minimally invasive and conventional surgery for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) in Chinese Han population. SETTING: China. METHODS: An electronic search up to November 2013 was performed to retrieve all relevant articles. The overall standardized mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes and odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous variables as well as their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to compare the efficacy of minimally invasive and conventional surgery. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies involving 1913 patients treated by minimally invasive surgery and 2295 patients treated by conversational surgery were included in this meta-analysis. The overall estimate indicated that minimally invasive surgery could significantly decrease the hospitalization time (SMD = -2.03, 95% CI, -2.49 to 1.56, P < 0.0001), blood loss (SMD = -2.65, 95% CI -3.33 to 1.97, P < 0.0001), incision length (SMD = -3.57, 95% CI, -4.39 to 2.75, P < 0.0001), recurrence rate (odds ratio (OR) = 0.22, 95 CI: 0.08-0.60, P = 0.003) and complications (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.25-0.92, P = 0.03) and increase the postoperative excellent rate (OR = 1.82, 95% CI, 1.44-2.31, P < 0.0001) compared with conventional surgery. In addition, the pooled data showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the operative time (SMD = -0.58, 95% CI, -1.32 to 0.15, P = 0.12) between LDH patients treated by minimally invasive and conventional surgery. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, minimally invasive surgery was a more safe and effective treatment for treating LDH in Chinese Han population when compared with conventional surgery.
Authors: Marie Dorow; Margrit Löbner; Janine Stein; Alexander Konnopka; Hans J Meisel; Lutz Günther; Jürgen Meixensberger; Katarina Stengler; Hans-Helmut König; Steffi G Riedel-Heller Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-01-20 Impact factor: 3.240