Is reduction or arthrodesis in situ the optimal choice for adolescent spondylolisthesis?—a systematic review and meta- analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Controversy remains about the choice of reduction or arthrodesis in situ for surgical management of adolescent spondylolisthesis, while no systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to determine which one is the optimal surgical choice. The study aims to compare outcomes of the two surgical strategies for adolescent spondylolisthesis. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed through PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, OVID/MEDLINE, CBM, CNKI, and Wanfang with a cutoff date of May 21st, 2021. Search terms included "spondylolisthesis", "in situ" and "reduction". Included studies had following characteristics: (I) participants: adolescents with spondylolisthesis. (II) Intervention: reduction following arthrodesis. (III) Control: arthrodesis in situ. (IV) Outcomes: postoperative clinical and/or radiographic results. (V) Study design: randomized controlled trial (RCT), cohort or case-control study. Data were analyzed with Review Manager 5.4, and risk of bias assessment of studies was assessed via Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS). RESULTS: Six cohort studies were included, with NOS scores of all ≥6. There were no significant differences regarding operative time [mean difference (MD) =152.62; 95% [confidence interval (CI)]: -54.02 to 359.26; I2=96%; P=0.15], blood loss (MD =786.61; 95% CI: -646.82 to 2,220.04; I2=90%; P=0.28), patient satisfaction (MD =1.98; 95% CI: 0.72 to 5.43; I2=0%; P=0.18), neurological complications (MD =1.02; 95% CI: 0.25 to 4.18; I2=0%; P=0.98), or total complications (MD =0.59; 95% CI: 0.29 to 1.19; I2=0%; P=0.14). However, patients undergoing reduction achieved better radiographic results: fusion rate (MD =3.09; 95% CI: 1.22 to 7.84; I2=40%; P=0.02), postoperative pseudarthrosis (MD =0.35; 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.79; I2=24%; P=0.01), percentage of slippage (MD =-20.58; 95% CI: -26.32 to -14.84; I2=0%; P<0.00001), and slipping angle (MD =-10.05; 95% CI: -14.55 to -5.54; I2=0%; P<0.0001). And no overt publication bias was found in the studies. DISCUSSION: Both reduction and arthrodesis in situ in adolescent spondylolisthesis are safe and demonstrate good clinical outcomes. However, reduction showed better radiographic results and was associated with less pseudarthrosis, better relief of disability, and improvements in self-image. In conclusion, reduction may be the optimal choice compared with arthrodesis in situ, but further verification of these findings is recommended using RCTs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.036 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".