| Abstrakt: |
Study Design: Systematic review. Objective: To compare the efficacy of the posterior approach and combined anterior-posterior approach in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) with cervical spine fracture by meta-analysis. Methods: The databases PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies on the comparison of the posterior approach group and the combined anterior-posterior approach group in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis combined with cervical spine fracture from database establishment to August 2023. The procedure time, intraoperative blood loss, the rates of neurological improvement, mean change in the postoperative neurological function, complication rates, rates of revised surgery, and mortality were extracted. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software provided by Cochrane Library. Results: A total of 11 retrospective cohort studies with a total of 215 patients were included in this study. The posterior approach group had lower intraoperative blood loss than the combined anterior-posterior approach group [Mean difference (MD) = -146.05, 95%CI(-187.40,-104.69), P <.00001]; the operation time was significantly less in the posterior approach group than in the combined anterior-posterior approach group [MD = -95.34, 95%CI(-113.13,-77.55), P <.00001]. There were no statistically significant differences in the neurological improvement rates, mean changes in postoperative neurological function, complication rates, modified surgery rates, and mortality rates. Conclusion: Both the posterior approach and combined anterior and posterior approach can achieve good results. Clinicians should develop an individualized approach based on the patient's fracture type, degree of spinal cord injury, fracture stability, fracture dislocation, general condition, and underlying disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
