To systematically compare the efficacy and safety of lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) with the efficacy and safety of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD). The electronic databases PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched for the period from the establishment of the databases to March 2018. The peer-reviewed articles that investigate the safety and efficacy of TDR and ALIF were retrieved under the given search terms. Quality assessment must be done independently by two authors according to each item of criterion. The statistical analyses were performed using RevMan (version 5.3) and Stata (version 14.0). The random-effect model was carried out to pool the data. The I² statistic was used to evaluate heterogeneity. The sensitivity analysis was carried out to assess the robustness of the results of meta-analyses by omitting the articles one by one. Six studies (5 randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 1 observational study) involving 1093 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The risk of bias of the studies could be considered as low to moderate. Operative time (MD = 4.95; 95% CI -18.91–28.81; P = 0.68), intraoperative blood loss (MD = 4.95; 95% CI -18.91–28.81; P = 0.68), hospital stay (MD = -0.33; 95% CI, -0.67–0.01; P = 0.05), complications (RR = 0.96; 95% CI 0.91–1.02; P = 0.18) and re-operation rate (RR = 0.54; 95% CI 0.14–2.12; P = 0.38) were without significant clinical difference between groups. Patients in the TDR group had higher postoperative satisfaction (RR = 1.19; 95% CI 1.07–1.32; P = 0.001) and, better improvements in ODI (MD = -10.99; 95% CI -21.50- -0.48; P = 0.04), VAS (MD = -10.56; 95% CI -19.99- -1.13; P = 0.03) and postoperative lumbar mobility than did patients in the ALIF group. The results showed that TDR has significant superiority in term of reduced clinical symptoms, improved physical function and preserved range of motion for the treatment of LDDD compared to ALIF. TDR may be an ideal alternative for the selected patients with LDDD in the short-term. However, the results of this study cannot suggest the use of TDR instead of ALIF in lumbar spine treatment only in the light of short term results. More studies that are well-designed, that are of high-quality and that have larger samples are needed to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of TDR with at the long-term follow-up. Therapeutic Level 3

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the number of fused segments, the timing of surgery and their interaction on the prognosis of patients with cervical spinal cord injury without fracture and dislocation (CSCIWFD), and to determine the appropriate time restrictions for early surgery in CSCIWFD patients based on the current diagnosis and treatment system in southern China. Methods: CSCIWFD patients who underwent anterior cervical decompression and internal fusion (ACDF) from January 2012 to June 2017 were selected. The patients were grouped according to the timing of surgery and the number of fused segments and evaluated based on their American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) score, ASIA impairment scale, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score before and after surgery. SPSS22.0 software was used for the statistical analysis. Results: The ASIA score, JOA score, and ASIA impairment scale in all follow-ups were significantly higher than before surgery (p < 0.05). The ASIA and JOA scores at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery of the patients who underwent ACDF within 72 h were significantly better than those of the patients who underwent ACDF after 72 h (p < 0.05). There were significant differences in postoperative ASIA and JOA scores at 12 and 24 months between the short-segment and three-segment fusion groups (p < 0.05). The results of the interaction between the surgical timing and the number of the fused segments showed that the postoperative ASIA and JOA scores at 6, 12, and 24 months were significantly higher in the patients who underwent early short-segment fusion than in those who underwent delayed short-segment fusion (p < 0.05). However, no statistically significant difference was found between early and delayed surgery in the patients who underwent three-segment fusion (p > 0.05). Conclusion: ACDF is safe and effective for the treatment of CSCIWFD. For patients with single- or double-segment injury, early (within 72 h) ACDF is associated with a more satisfactory prognosis. Due to the limitation of the small sample size, we cautiously recommend that 72 h can be used as a time limit for early surgery for CSCIWFD patients in regions where earlier surgery cannot be provided by the current diagnosis and treatment system.

BACKGROUND:The aim of this study was to investigate the biomechanical fixation effects of different segments of the goat spine on adjacent segmental motion and intradiscal pressure (IDP) change. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Eighteen goat spine specimens were...

Background: The Lumbar sagittal parameters might be related to modic changes (MCs). However, studies on this topic have rarely been reported. The aim of this study was to identify the relationships between the lumbar sagittal parameters and the development of MCs. Methods: The lumbar sagittal parameters of 321 patients with chronic low back pain from May 2016 to August 2018 were measured on X-ray by using Surgimap surgical planning software. Univariable analyses were used to test the potential variables of interest. Logistic regression models were then performed for the significant parameters to identify the independent factors associated with the development of MCs. Results: More patients in the MCs group were older with more number of female than in the disc degeneration group (p < 0.05). In the univariate analysis, significant differences were detected for the parameters of lumbar lordosis, sacral slope, intervertebral height index, endplate concave angle, and intervertebral angle only at the L5/S1 level between the two groups. The results of logistic regression analysis showed that a smaller intervertebral height index was positively associated with the development of MCs at the level of L3/4 (p < 0.05). However, the positive role of gender was only for MCs at the L5/S1 level (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this study revealed that there were negative relationships between the lumbar sagittal parameters and MCs. Furthermore, being female and having a narrow intervertebral space were the independent risk factors for the development of MCs at the corresponding lumbar levels. Interestingly, body mass index might be not associated with MCs for the Chinese population.