Abstract：
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of consensus on the use of postoperative bracing for lumbar degenerative conditions. Spine surgeons typically determine whether to apply postoperative braces based primarily on clinical experience rather than robust, evidence-based medical data. Thus, the present study sought to assess the impact of postoperative bracing on clinical outcomes, complications, and fusion rates following lumbar fusion surgery in patients with degenerative spinal conditions.
METHODS: Only randomized controlled studies published between January 1990 and 20 October 2023 were included in this meta-analysis. The primary outcome measures consisted of pre- and postoperative assessments of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Improvements in VAS and ODI scores were analyzed in the early postoperative period (1 month after operation) and at final follow-up, respectively. The analysis also encompassed fusion rates and complications.
RESULTS: Five studies with 362 patients were included in the present meta-analysis. In the early postoperative period, the brace group showed a relatively better improvement in ODI scores compared with the no-brace group (19.47 vs 18.18), although this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.34). Similarly, during the late postoperative period, the brace group demonstrated a slightly greater improvement in VAS scores in comparison to the no-brace group (4.05 vs 3.84), but this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.30). The complication rate was relatively lower in the brace group compared with the no-brace group (14.9% vs 17.4%), although there was no statistical difference between the 2 groups (P = 0.83). Importantly, there were no substantial differences in fusion rates between patients with or without braces.
CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis revealed that the implementation of a brace following lumbar fusion surgery did not yield substantial differences in terms of postoperative pain relief, functional recovery, complication rates, or fusion rates when compared with cases where no brace was employed.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides valuable insights into the clinical impact of postoperative bracing following lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative spinal conditions.
METHODS:
METHODS: Only randomized controlled studies published between January 1990 and 20 October 2023 were included in this meta-analysis. The primary outcome measures consisted of pre- and postoperative assessments of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Improvements in VAS and ODI scores were analyzed in the early postoperative period (1 month after operation) and at final follow-up, respectively. The analysis also encompassed fusion rates and complications.
RESULTS: Five studies with 362 patients were included in the present meta-analysis. In the early postoperative period, the brace group showed a relatively better improvement in ODI scores compared with the no-brace group (19.47 vs 18.18), although this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.34). Similarly, during the late postoperative period, the brace group demonstrated a slightly greater improvement in VAS scores in comparison to the no-brace group (4.05 vs 3.84), but this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.30). The complication rate was relatively lower in the brace group compared with the no-brace group (14.9% vs 17.4%), although there was no statistical difference between the 2 groups (P = 0.83). Importantly, there were no substantial differences in fusion rates between patients with or without braces.
CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis revealed that the implementation of a brace following lumbar fusion surgery did not yield substantial differences in terms of postoperative pain relief, functional recovery, complication rates, or fusion rates when compared with cases where no brace was employed.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides valuable insights into the clinical impact of postoperative bracing following lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative spinal conditions.
METHODS:
摘要：
背景：对于腰椎退行性疾病术后支具的使用缺乏共识。脊柱外科医生通常主要根据临床经验而不是健壮地决定是否应用术后支具。循证医学数据。因此，本研究试图评估术后支撑对临床结果的影响，并发症,退行性脊柱疾病患者腰椎融合手术后的融合率。
方法：本荟萃分析仅纳入1990年1月至2023年10月20日发表的随机对照研究。主要结果指标包括Oswestry残疾指数（ODI）和视觉模拟量表（VAS）评分的术前和术后评估。术后早期（术后1个月）和最终随访时，分析VAS和ODI评分的改善情况，分别。分析还包括融合率和并发症。
结果：本荟萃分析中纳入了5项包含362名患者的研究。在术后早期，与无支架组相比，支架组的ODI评分改善相对较好（19.47vs18.18），尽管这种差异没有统计学意义（P=0.34）。同样，在术后后期，与无支架组相比，支架组的VAS评分略有改善（4.05vs3.84），但这种差异没有达到统计学意义(P=0.30)。与无支架组相比，支架组的并发症发生率相对较低（14.9％vs17.4％），两组间无统计学差异(P=0.83)。重要的是,有或没有支架的患者的融合率没有实质性差异.
结论：目前的荟萃分析显示，腰椎融合术后支架的实施在术后疼痛缓解方面没有实质性差异，功能恢复，并发症发生率,或与未使用支具的情况相比的融合率。
结论：这项荟萃分析为腰椎融合手术后支撑治疗退行性脊柱疾病的临床影响提供了有价值的见解。
方法：
方法：本荟萃分析仅纳入1990年1月至2023年10月20日发表的随机对照研究。主要结果指标包括Oswestry残疾指数（ODI）和视觉模拟量表（VAS）评分的术前和术后评估。术后早期（术后1个月）和最终随访时，分析VAS和ODI评分的改善情况，分别。分析还包括融合率和并发症。
结果：本荟萃分析中纳入了5项包含362名患者的研究。在术后早期，与无支架组相比，支架组的ODI评分改善相对较好（19.47vs18.18），尽管这种差异没有统计学意义（P=0.34）。同样，在术后后期，与无支架组相比，支架组的VAS评分略有改善（4.05vs3.84），但这种差异没有达到统计学意义(P=0.30)。与无支架组相比，支架组的并发症发生率相对较低（14.9％vs17.4％），两组间无统计学差异(P=0.83)。重要的是,有或没有支架的患者的融合率没有实质性差异.
结论：目前的荟萃分析显示，腰椎融合术后支架的实施在术后疼痛缓解方面没有实质性差异，功能恢复，并发症发生率,或与未使用支具的情况相比的融合率。
结论：这项荟萃分析为腰椎融合手术后支撑治疗退行性脊柱疾病的临床影响提供了有价值的见解。
方法：
