Adjacent segment degeneration and disease after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving procedures: a meta-analysis
Purpose The purpose of our study was to compare lumbar fusion and motion-preserving procedures to determine whether lumbar fusion may be associated with a higher prevalence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) or adjacent segment disease (ASDis). Methods We performed a systematic review and meta...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology 2014-07, Vol.24 (Suppl 1), p.245-253 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 253 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | Suppl 1 |
| container_start_page | 245 |
| container_title | European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology |
| container_volume | 24 |
| creator | Ren, Chunpeng Song, Yueming Liu, Limin Xue, Youdi |
| description | Purpose
The purpose of our study was to compare lumbar fusion and motion-preserving procedures to determine whether lumbar fusion may be associated with a higher prevalence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) or adjacent segment disease (ASDis).
Methods
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for articles published up to July 2013. We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that reported ASDeg or ASDis after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving devices. Two authors independently extracted the articles and the predefined data.
Results
A total of 13 studies with 1,270 patients met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Our analysis showed that the prevalence of ASDeg and ASDis, and adjacent segment reoperation rate in the fusion group were higher than those in the motion-preserving devices group (
P
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00590-014-1445-9 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1541371655</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2837223482</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3209-64a9d88753248e97b3793a69cb07e7ccb8b5af5d128cf0a2f4ca81db64ff8a7e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUuLFTEQhYMozkN_gBsJuHETJ89O4m4Y1BEGZjOzDtVJ9bUv_bgm3cr996a5o4Lgqoqq75wqOIS8EfyD4NxeFc6N54wLzYTWhvln5FxoJZngjXte-0Yp5nhjzshFKXvOhfHCvCRnUlvprPXn5Hid9hBxWmjB3bjVhDucMMPSzxOFKdHUF4SCFLoFMx3WsYVMu7Vs-ziPB8iY6M9--UbHeROxQ8aC-Uc_7eghzxHTWgcfKdARF2AwwXAsfXlFXnQwFHz9VC_J4-dPDze37O7-y9eb6zsWleSeNRp8cs4aJbVDb1tlvYLGx5ZbtDG2rjXQmSSkix0H2ekITqS20V3nwKK6JO9PvvWX7yuWJYx9iTgMMOG8liCMFsqKxpiKvvsH3c9rrv-WIJ2yUirtZKXEiYp5LiVjFw65HyEfg-BhyyWccgk1l7DlEnzVvH1yXtsR0x_F7yAqIE9Aqatph_nv6f-7_gK5CZou</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2837223482</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Adjacent segment degeneration and disease after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving procedures: a meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Ren, Chunpeng ; Song, Yueming ; Liu, Limin ; Xue, Youdi</creator><creatorcontrib>Ren, Chunpeng ; Song, Yueming ; Liu, Limin ; Xue, Youdi</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
The purpose of our study was to compare lumbar fusion and motion-preserving procedures to determine whether lumbar fusion may be associated with a higher prevalence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) or adjacent segment disease (ASDis).
Methods
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for articles published up to July 2013. We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that reported ASDeg or ASDis after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving devices. Two authors independently extracted the articles and the predefined data.
Results
A total of 13 studies with 1,270 patients met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Our analysis showed that the prevalence of ASDeg and ASDis, and adjacent segment reoperation rate in the fusion group were higher than those in the motion-preserving devices group (
P
< 0.0001,
P
= 0.0008, and
P
< 0.0001, respectively). The prevalence of ASDeg and reoperation rate in the motion-preserving devices group were significantly lower than that in the fusion group for both short- and long-term follow-up (
P
= 0.0008 and
P
= 0.001 at <5 years of follow-up;
P
= 0.003 and
P
= 0.001 at >5 years of follow-up).
Conclusions
The current evidence suggests that lumbar fusion may result in a higher prevalence of adjacent segment degeneration or disease than motion-preserving procedures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1633-8065</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1068</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00590-014-1445-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24728779</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Paris: Springer Paris</publisher><subject>Epidemiologic Methods ; Equipment Design ; Humans ; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - etiology ; Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Meta-analysis ; Original Article ; Prostheses and Implants - adverse effects ; Reoperation - statistics & numerical data ; Spinal Diseases - etiology ; Spinal Fusion - adverse effects ; Surgical Orthopedics ; Traumatic Surgery ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology, 2014-07, Vol.24 (Suppl 1), p.245-253</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag France 2014</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag France 2014.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3209-64a9d88753248e97b3793a69cb07e7ccb8b5af5d128cf0a2f4ca81db64ff8a7e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3209-64a9d88753248e97b3793a69cb07e7ccb8b5af5d128cf0a2f4ca81db64ff8a7e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00590-014-1445-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00590-014-1445-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27911,27912,41475,42544,51306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24728779$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ren, Chunpeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Song, Yueming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Limin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xue, Youdi</creatorcontrib><title>Adjacent segment degeneration and disease after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving procedures: a meta-analysis</title><title>European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology</title><addtitle>Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol</addtitle><addtitle>Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol</addtitle><description>Purpose
The purpose of our study was to compare lumbar fusion and motion-preserving procedures to determine whether lumbar fusion may be associated with a higher prevalence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) or adjacent segment disease (ASDis).
Methods
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for articles published up to July 2013. We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that reported ASDeg or ASDis after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving devices. Two authors independently extracted the articles and the predefined data.
Results
A total of 13 studies with 1,270 patients met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Our analysis showed that the prevalence of ASDeg and ASDis, and adjacent segment reoperation rate in the fusion group were higher than those in the motion-preserving devices group (
P
< 0.0001,
P
= 0.0008, and
P
< 0.0001, respectively). The prevalence of ASDeg and reoperation rate in the motion-preserving devices group were significantly lower than that in the fusion group for both short- and long-term follow-up (
P
= 0.0008 and
P
= 0.001 at <5 years of follow-up;
P
= 0.003 and
P
= 0.001 at >5 years of follow-up).
Conclusions
The current evidence suggests that lumbar fusion may result in a higher prevalence of adjacent segment degeneration or disease than motion-preserving procedures.</description><subject>Epidemiologic Methods</subject><subject>Equipment Design</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - etiology</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Prostheses and Implants - adverse effects</subject><subject>Reoperation - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Spinal Diseases - etiology</subject><subject>Spinal Fusion - adverse effects</subject><subject>Surgical Orthopedics</subject><subject>Traumatic Surgery</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1633-8065</issn><issn>1432-1068</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUuLFTEQhYMozkN_gBsJuHETJ89O4m4Y1BEGZjOzDtVJ9bUv_bgm3cr996a5o4Lgqoqq75wqOIS8EfyD4NxeFc6N54wLzYTWhvln5FxoJZngjXte-0Yp5nhjzshFKXvOhfHCvCRnUlvprPXn5Hid9hBxWmjB3bjVhDucMMPSzxOFKdHUF4SCFLoFMx3WsYVMu7Vs-ziPB8iY6M9--UbHeROxQ8aC-Uc_7eghzxHTWgcfKdARF2AwwXAsfXlFXnQwFHz9VC_J4-dPDze37O7-y9eb6zsWleSeNRp8cs4aJbVDb1tlvYLGx5ZbtDG2rjXQmSSkix0H2ekITqS20V3nwKK6JO9PvvWX7yuWJYx9iTgMMOG8liCMFsqKxpiKvvsH3c9rrv-WIJ2yUirtZKXEiYp5LiVjFw65HyEfg-BhyyWccgk1l7DlEnzVvH1yXtsR0x_F7yAqIE9Aqatph_nv6f-7_gK5CZou</recordid><startdate>20140701</startdate><enddate>20140701</enddate><creator>Ren, Chunpeng</creator><creator>Song, Yueming</creator><creator>Liu, Limin</creator><creator>Xue, Youdi</creator><general>Springer Paris</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140701</creationdate><title>Adjacent segment degeneration and disease after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving procedures: a meta-analysis</title><author>Ren, Chunpeng ; Song, Yueming ; Liu, Limin ; Xue, Youdi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3209-64a9d88753248e97b3793a69cb07e7ccb8b5af5d128cf0a2f4ca81db64ff8a7e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Epidemiologic Methods</topic><topic>Equipment Design</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - etiology</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Prostheses and Implants - adverse effects</topic><topic>Reoperation - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Spinal Diseases - etiology</topic><topic>Spinal Fusion - adverse effects</topic><topic>Surgical Orthopedics</topic><topic>Traumatic Surgery</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ren, Chunpeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Song, Yueming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Limin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xue, Youdi</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ren, Chunpeng</au><au>Song, Yueming</au><au>Liu, Limin</au><au>Xue, Youdi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Adjacent segment degeneration and disease after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving procedures: a meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology</jtitle><stitle>Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol</stitle><addtitle>Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol</addtitle><date>2014-07-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>Suppl 1</issue><spage>245</spage><epage>253</epage><pages>245-253</pages><issn>1633-8065</issn><eissn>1432-1068</eissn><abstract>Purpose
The purpose of our study was to compare lumbar fusion and motion-preserving procedures to determine whether lumbar fusion may be associated with a higher prevalence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) or adjacent segment disease (ASDis).
Methods
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for articles published up to July 2013. We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that reported ASDeg or ASDis after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving devices. Two authors independently extracted the articles and the predefined data.
Results
A total of 13 studies with 1,270 patients met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Our analysis showed that the prevalence of ASDeg and ASDis, and adjacent segment reoperation rate in the fusion group were higher than those in the motion-preserving devices group (
P
< 0.0001,
P
= 0.0008, and
P
< 0.0001, respectively). The prevalence of ASDeg and reoperation rate in the motion-preserving devices group were significantly lower than that in the fusion group for both short- and long-term follow-up (
P
= 0.0008 and
P
= 0.001 at <5 years of follow-up;
P
= 0.003 and
P
= 0.001 at >5 years of follow-up).
Conclusions
The current evidence suggests that lumbar fusion may result in a higher prevalence of adjacent segment degeneration or disease than motion-preserving procedures.</abstract><cop>Paris</cop><pub>Springer Paris</pub><pmid>24728779</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00590-014-1445-9</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1633-8065 |
| ispartof | European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology, 2014-07, Vol.24 (Suppl 1), p.245-253 |
| issn | 1633-8065 1432-1068 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1541371655 |
| source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
| subjects | Epidemiologic Methods Equipment Design Humans Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - etiology Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery Medicine Medicine & Public Health Meta-analysis Original Article Prostheses and Implants - adverse effects Reoperation - statistics & numerical data Spinal Diseases - etiology Spinal Fusion - adverse effects Surgical Orthopedics Traumatic Surgery Treatment Outcome |
| title | Adjacent segment degeneration and disease after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving procedures: a meta-analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T20%3A51%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Adjacent%20segment%20degeneration%20and%20disease%20after%20lumbar%20fusion%20compared%20with%20motion-preserving%20procedures:%20a%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20orthopaedic%20surgery%20&%20traumatology&rft.au=Ren,%20Chunpeng&rft.date=2014-07-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=Suppl%201&rft.spage=245&rft.epage=253&rft.pages=245-253&rft.issn=1633-8065&rft.eissn=1432-1068&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00590-014-1445-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2837223482%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2837223482&rft_id=info:pmid/24728779&rfr_iscdi=true |