SPINE
Anterior and posterior approaches for burst fractures have similar outcomes
Eur Spine J. 2013 Oct;22(10):2176-837 studies (4 randomized control trials and 3 controlled studies) were included in this meta-analysis to determine the superior surgical treatment for burst fractures between anterior and posterior approaches. Functional and clinical outcomes were assessed in a total of 331 patients. The results of this meta-analysis indicate similar canal encroachment, Cobb angle, neurological function, and complication rates between treatments. The posterior approach was superior in operation cost and time. The limited quality of studies included should be noted as there is a need for further high-quality randomized trials on this topic.
Unlock the full ACE Report
You have access to {0} free articles per month.Click below to unlock and view this {1}
Unlock NowCritical appraisals of the latest, high-impact randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in orthopaedics
Access to OrthoEvidence podcast content, including collaborations with the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviews with internationally recognized surgeons, and roundtable discussions on orthopaedic news and topics
Subscription to The Pulse, a twice-weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to help you make better clinical decisions
Exclusive access to original content articles, including in-house systematic reviews, and articles on health research methods and hot orthopaedic topics
Or upgrade today and gain access to all OrthoEvidence content for just $1.99 per week.
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to "The Pulse"
Evidence-Based Orthopaedics direct to your inbox.
{0} of {1} free articles
Become an OrthoEvidence Premium Member. Expand your perspective with high-quality evidence.
Upgrade Now
