Tao Lan1, Yang Chen2, Shi-Yu Hu3, Ao-Lin Li4, Xin-Jian Yang5. 1. Department of Spine Surgery, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518035, PR China. 2. Department of Spine Surgery, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518035, PR China. Electronic address: drchenyang@163.com. 3. Department of Neurology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518035, PR China. 4. Department of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518035, PR China. 5. Department of Spine Surgery, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518035, PR China. Electronic address: 275305207@qq.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety between patients with thoracolumbar burst fracture who underwent posterior fixation alone (non-fusion) and supplemented with fusion. METHODS: A comprehensive search of related literature was performed in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library. Clinical outcomes (LBOS and VAS), surgical outcomes (operation time, blood loss, hospital stay and perioperative complications), and radiographic outcomes (kyphotic angle, decreased vertebral body height and segmental motion) were assessed in the meta-analysis. Data analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: Five RCTs and three retrospective studies including a total of 445 cases were identified. We found that there was no significant difference in terms of LBOS, VAS, implant-related complications, kyphotic and VBH parameters. However, there was a significant difference regarding blood loss, operation time, segmental motion and donor site pain between fusion and non-fusion. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that posterior fixation alone could achieve satisfactory clinical and radiological results in treating thoracolumbar burst fracture. Moreover, posterior fixation without fusion was superior to additional fusion with less blood loss, shorter operation time, better segmental motion and lower donor site pain.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety between patients with thoracolumbar burst fracture who underwent posterior fixation alone (non-fusion) and supplemented with fusion. METHODS: A comprehensive search of related literature was performed in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library. Clinical outcomes (LBOS and VAS), surgical outcomes (operation time, blood loss, hospital stay and perioperative complications), and radiographic outcomes (kyphotic angle, decreased vertebral body height and segmental motion) were assessed in the meta-analysis. Data analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: Five RCTs and three retrospective studies including a total of 445 cases were identified. We found that there was no significant difference in terms of LBOS, VAS, implant-related complications, kyphotic and VBH parameters. However, there was a significant difference regarding blood loss, operation time, segmental motion and donor site pain between fusion and non-fusion. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that posterior fixation alone could achieve satisfactory clinical and radiological results in treating thoracolumbar burst fracture. Moreover, posterior fixation without fusion was superior to additional fusion with less blood loss, shorter operation time, better segmental motion and lower donor site pain.