A systematic review and meta-analysis of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

<h4>Background</h4>Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has become one of the most widely used procedures for lumbar spinal disorders. However, it is still unclear whether TLIF with unilateral pedicle screw (PS) fixation is as effective as that with bilateral PS fixation. We per...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Xu-Qi Hu, Xin-Lei Wu, Cong Xu, Xu-Hao Zheng, Yong-Long Jin, Li-Jun Wu, Xiang-Yang Wang, Hua-Zi Xu, Nai-Feng Tian
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087501&type=printable
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849254173552410624
author Xu-Qi Hu
Xin-Lei Wu
Cong Xu
Xu-Hao Zheng
Yong-Long Jin
Li-Jun Wu
Xiang-Yang Wang
Hua-Zi Xu
Nai-Feng Tian
author_facet Xu-Qi Hu
Xin-Lei Wu
Cong Xu
Xu-Hao Zheng
Yong-Long Jin
Li-Jun Wu
Xiang-Yang Wang
Hua-Zi Xu
Nai-Feng Tian
author_sort Xu-Qi Hu
collection DOAJ
description <h4>Background</h4>Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has become one of the most widely used procedures for lumbar spinal disorders. However, it is still unclear whether TLIF with unilateral pedicle screw (PS) fixation is as effective as that with bilateral PS fixation. We performed a meta-analysis of the literatures and aimed to gain a better understanding of whether TLIF with unilateral PS fixation was safe and effective for lumbar diseases.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>We systematically searched Ovid, Springer, and Medline databases for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral versus bilateral PS fixation in TLIF. Risk of bias in included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We generated pooled risk ratios or weighted mean differences across studies. According to our predefined inclusion criteria, seven RCTs with a total of 441 patients were included in this study. Baseline characteristics were similar between the unilateral and bilateral groups. Our meta-analysis showed that no significant difference was detected between the two groups in terms of postoperative clinical function, fusion status, reoperation rate, complication rate, and hospital stay (p>0.05). Pooled estimates revealed that the unilateral group was associated with significantly reduced implant cost, operative time and blood loss (p<0.05).<h4>Conclusions/significances</h4>Our meta-analysis suggested TLIF with unilateral PS fixation was as safe and effective as that with bilateral PS fixation for lumbar diseases in selected patients. Despite these findings, our meta-analysis was based on studies with small sample size and different study characteristics that might lead to the inconsistent results such as various functional outcomes among the included studies. Therefore, high-quality randomized controlled trials with larger sample size are also needed to further clarify these issues and to provide the long-term outcomes.
format Article
id doaj-art-c7c51181b37a4d9bb8fe828ed30f17b1
institution Kabale University
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2014-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-c7c51181b37a4d9bb8fe828ed30f17b12025-08-20T03:56:05ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0191e8750110.1371/journal.pone.0087501A systematic review and meta-analysis of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.Xu-Qi HuXin-Lei WuCong XuXu-Hao ZhengYong-Long JinLi-Jun WuXiang-Yang WangHua-Zi XuNai-Feng Tian<h4>Background</h4>Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has become one of the most widely used procedures for lumbar spinal disorders. However, it is still unclear whether TLIF with unilateral pedicle screw (PS) fixation is as effective as that with bilateral PS fixation. We performed a meta-analysis of the literatures and aimed to gain a better understanding of whether TLIF with unilateral PS fixation was safe and effective for lumbar diseases.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>We systematically searched Ovid, Springer, and Medline databases for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral versus bilateral PS fixation in TLIF. Risk of bias in included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We generated pooled risk ratios or weighted mean differences across studies. According to our predefined inclusion criteria, seven RCTs with a total of 441 patients were included in this study. Baseline characteristics were similar between the unilateral and bilateral groups. Our meta-analysis showed that no significant difference was detected between the two groups in terms of postoperative clinical function, fusion status, reoperation rate, complication rate, and hospital stay (p>0.05). Pooled estimates revealed that the unilateral group was associated with significantly reduced implant cost, operative time and blood loss (p<0.05).<h4>Conclusions/significances</h4>Our meta-analysis suggested TLIF with unilateral PS fixation was as safe and effective as that with bilateral PS fixation for lumbar diseases in selected patients. Despite these findings, our meta-analysis was based on studies with small sample size and different study characteristics that might lead to the inconsistent results such as various functional outcomes among the included studies. Therefore, high-quality randomized controlled trials with larger sample size are also needed to further clarify these issues and to provide the long-term outcomes.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087501&type=printable
spellingShingle Xu-Qi Hu
Xin-Lei Wu
Cong Xu
Xu-Hao Zheng
Yong-Long Jin
Li-Jun Wu
Xiang-Yang Wang
Hua-Zi Xu
Nai-Feng Tian
A systematic review and meta-analysis of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
PLoS ONE
title A systematic review and meta-analysis of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
title_full A systematic review and meta-analysis of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
title_fullStr A systematic review and meta-analysis of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review and meta-analysis of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
title_short A systematic review and meta-analysis of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
title_sort systematic review and meta analysis of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
url https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087501&type=printable
work_keys_str_mv AT xuqihu asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT xinleiwu asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT congxu asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT xuhaozheng asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT yonglongjin asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT lijunwu asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT xiangyangwang asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT huazixu asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT naifengtian asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT xuqihu systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT xinleiwu systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT congxu systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT xuhaozheng systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT yonglongjin systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT lijunwu systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT xiangyangwang systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT huazixu systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion
AT naifengtian systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofunilateralversusbilateralpediclescrewfixationintransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusion