
Spine
Some benefits seen with minimally invasive vs. open surgery posterior lumbar fusion
J Neurosurg Spine. 2016 Mar;24(3):416-27One randomized controlled trial (RCT) and 25 comparative cohort studies (n=14 prospective; 11 retrospective) were included in this meta-analysis to compared safety and efficacy outcomes between minimally invasive and open posterior lumbar fusion. The findings of this analysis demonstrated significantly favourable outcomes in terms of estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, time to ambulation, Oswestry Disability Index scores, overall complication rate, and medical complication rate among groups who underwent minimally invasive surgery compared to open surgery, however, increased intraoperative fluoroscopy use was also noted. Outcomes which did not significantly differ between minimally invasive and open posterior lumbar fusion were operative time, VAS back and leg pain, rates of intraoperative dural tear, infection, and union rates.
Unlock the full article
Get unlimited access to OrthoEvidence with a free trial
Start TrialCritical 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 continue reading this full article
Register Now

Subscribe to "The Pulse"
Evidence-Based Orthopaedics direct to your inbox.