Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Tratamiento quirúrgico versus no quirúrgico para las fracturas toracolumbares por estallido sin déficit neurológico

Appendices

Appendix 1. Search strategies

The Cochrane Library (Wiley Online Library)

#1   MeSH descriptor Spinal Injuries explode all trees (597)
#2 MeSH descriptor Lumbar Vertebrae, this term only (1738)
#3   MeSH descriptor Thoracic Vertebrae, this term only  (255)
#4   (#2 OR #3)  (1870)
#5   (#1 AND #4) (137)
#6   (burst or compression) :ti,ab,kw  (3990)
#7   (#5 AND #6) (36)
#8   (thoracolumbar or (thoraco NEXT lumbar)) :ti,ab,kw (131)
#9   ((burst NEAR fract*) or (burst NEAR injur*) or (compression NEAR fract*)) :ti,ab,kw (267)
#10 (#8 AND #9) (37)
#11 (#7 OR #10) (39) 

MEDLINE (Ovid Online)

1    exp Spinal Injuries/ (16163)
2    Thoracic Vertebrae/ (14419)
3    Lumbar Vertebrae/ (35605)
4    or/2‐3 (43539)
5    and/1,4 (4248)
6    burst.tw. (30639)
7    and/5‐6 (552)
8    (thoracolumbar or thoraco lumbar).tw. (5133)
9    ((burst adj5 (fract$ or injur$)) or (compression adj5 (fract$ or injur$))).tw. (5670)
10  and/8‐9 (632)
11  or/7,10 (808)
12  randomized controlled trial.pt. (336136)
13  controlled clinical trial.pt. (85111)
14  Randomized Controlled Trials/ (82897)
15  Random Allocation/ (75700)
16  Double Blind Method/ (116905)
17  Single Blind Method/ (16674)
18  or/12‐17 (563705)
19  Animals/ not Humans/ (3686416)
20  18 not 19 (521244)
21  clinical trial.pt. (473453)
22  exp Clinical Trials as topic/ (260609)
23  (clinic$ adj25 trial$).tw. (214213)
24  ((singl$ or doubl$ or trebl$ or tripl$) adj25 (blind$ or mask$)).tw. (118294)
25  Placebos/ (31302)
26  placebo$.tw. (138905)
27  random$.tw. (574532)
28  Research Design/ (67613)
29  or/21‐28 (1186313)
30  29 not 19 (1095797)
31  30 not 20 (618404)
32  Comparative Study.pt. (1602137)
33  Evaluation Studies.pt. (171413)
34  Follow Up Studies/ (454503)
35  Prospective Studies/ (326935)
36  (control$ or prospectiv$ or volunteer$).tw. (2560395)
37  or/32‐36 (4253242)
38  37 not 19 (3297829)
39  38 not (20 or 31) (2689468)
40  20 or 31 or 39 (3829116)
41 11 and 40 (348)

EMBASE (Ovid Online)

1    Spine Fracture/ or Spine Injury/ (15502)
2    Vertebra Fracture/ (8813)
3    or/1‐2 (23778)
4    Thoracolumbar Spine/ (3154)
5    and/3‐4 (1235)
6    burst.tw. (35332)
7    and/5‐6 (297)
8    (thoracolumbar or thoraco lumbar).tw. (6440)
9    (burst adj5 (fract$ or injur$)).tw. (1260)
10  and/8‐9 (571)
11  or/7,10 (589)
12  exp Randomized Controlled Trial/ (328650)
13  exp Double Blind Procedure/ (110736)
14  exp Single Blind Procedure/ (16360)
15  exp Crossover Procedure/ (34922)
16  Controlled Study/ (3858969)
17  or/12‐16 (3937818)
18  ((clinical or controlled or comparative or placebo or prospective$ or randomi#ed) adj3 (trial or study)).tw. (643947)
19  (random$ adj7 (allocat$ or allot$ or assign$ or basis$ or divid$ or order$)).tw. (156994)
20  ((singl$ or doubl$ or trebl$ or tripl$) adj7 (blind$ or mask$)).tw. (146813)
21  (cross?over$ or (cross adj1 over$)).tw. (62664)
22  ((allocat$ or allot$ or assign$ or divid$) adj3 (condition$ or experiment$ or intervention$ or treatment$ or therap$ or control$ or group$)).tw. (196768)
23  or/18‐22 (961563)
24  or/17,23 (4412295)
25  limit 24 to human (2676479)
26  and/11,25 (185)

Chinese Biomedical Literature database

1. exp Spinal Injuries/
2. Thoracic Vertebrae/
3. Lumbar Vertebrae/
4. or/2‐3
5. and/1,4
6. burst.tw.
7. and/5‐6
8. (thoracolumbar or thoraco lumbar).tw.
9. ((burst and (fract? or injur?)) or (compression and (fract? or injur?))).tw.
10. and/8‐9
11. or/7,10
12. randomised controlled trial.pt.
13. controlled clinical trial.pt.
14. Randomized Controlled Trials/
15. Random Allocation/
16. Double‐Blind Method/
17. Single‐Blind Method/
18. or/12‐17
19. Animal/ and not Human/
20. 18 and not 19
21. clinical trial.pt.
22. exp Clinical Trials/
23. (clinic? and trial?).tw.
24. ((singl? or doubl? or trebl? or tripl?) and (mask? or blind?)).tw.
25. Placebos/
26. placebo?.tw.
27. random?.tw.
28. Research Design/
29. (latin and square).tw.
30. or/21‐29
31. 30 and not 19
32. 31 and not 20
33. Comparative Study/
34. exp Evaluation Studies/
35. Follow‐Up Studies/
36. Prospective Studies/
37. (control? or prospectiv? or volunteer?).tw.
38. Cross‐Over Studies/
39. or/33‐38
40. 39 and not 19
41. 40 and not (20 or 32)
42. or/20,32,41
43. and/11,20
44. and/11,32
45. and/11,41
46. or/43‐45 (1)

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 1 Visual Analogue Pain Scores (0 to 100 mm: worst) at follow‐up.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 1 Visual Analogue Pain Scores (0 to 100 mm: worst) at follow‐up.

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 2 Roland and Morris Questionnaire at follow‐up (0 to 24: worst result).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 2 Roland and Morris Questionnaire at follow‐up (0 to 24: worst result).

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 3 Visual Analogue Scale Spine Score (0 to 100 mm: best) at follow‐up.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 3 Visual Analogue Scale Spine Score (0 to 100 mm: best) at follow‐up.

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 4 Oswestry Questionnaire at minimum 24 months follow‐up.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 4 Oswestry Questionnaire at minimum 24 months follow‐up.

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 5 Return to work.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 5 Return to work.

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 6 Subsequent surgery (for complications).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 6 Subsequent surgery (for complications).

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 7 Complications.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 7 Complications.

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 8 Kyphosis at follow‐up (degrees).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 8 Kyphosis at follow‐up (degrees).

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 9 Degree of canal compromise (% occlusion) at 2 years.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment, Outcome 9 Degree of canal compromise (% occlusion) at 2 years.

Table 1. Siebenga 2006: individual patient data for patient‐reported outcomes of pain and disability

VAS pain (0 to 100 mm: no pain)

at final follow‐up

VAS spine score (0 to 100 mm: best outcome)

at final follow‐up

RMDQ‐24 at final follow‐up

Surgical

Non‐surgical

Surgical

Non‐surgical

Surgical

Non‐surgical

55

80

45

80

14

4

100

60

100

29

0

15

95

65

99

55

0

10

76

15

58

11

13

24

90

65

94

54

2

9

100

98

86

94

0

0

100

90

100

82

0

13

100

65

65

53

2

14

95

100

62

100

0

0

79

100

74

86

1

0

100

65

86

34

0

15

70

65

89

56

6

10

82

80

76

80

5

0

99

55

92

46

0

15

86

80

90

62

2

5

80

74

3

77

88

4

VAS = visual analogue scale

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Siebenga 2006: individual patient data for patient‐reported outcomes of pain and disability
Table 2. Wood 2003: individual patient data for patient‐reported outcomes of pain and disability

VAS pain (0 to 10 cm: worst)
at final follow‐up

Roland and Morris Questionnaire
at final follow‐up

Oswestry Questionnaire
at final follow‐up

Surgical

Non‐surgical

Surgical

Non‐surgical

Surgical

Non‐surgical

1

2

5

**

4

**

1

5

3

12

4

50

1.5

0

6

1

14

0

5

2

16

0

20

2

1

1

1

2

6

4

5

5

10

3

24

12

3

2

13

0

30

2

0

0

1

0

2

0

5

1

4

0

20

0

2

1.5

4

2

24

12

2

0

6

0

20

0

7.5

0

19

1

40

0

6

0

14

2

30

10

1

1

0

0

0

2

1

9

7

24

16

52

4

0

2

0

8

0

4

1

9

1

34

6

3

8

6

20

18

20

7

4

19

9

40

22

6

1

15

2

48

22

1

0

6

1

44

4

6

0

19

**

48

**

1

1

5

1

0

4

5

6

4

** = missing value
VAS = visual analogue scale

Figuras y tablas -
Table 2. Wood 2003: individual patient data for patient‐reported outcomes of pain and disability
Table 3. Wood 2003: SF‐36 scores for 8 domains at final follow‐up

Domain

Surgery

Non‐surgery

P Value

Pain

59

72

0.07

Health Perception

69

72

0.4

Physical Function

63

86

0.002

Social Function

84

83

0.8

Role; Physical

51

85

0.003

Role; Emotional

80

78

0.92

Mental Health

81

75

0.3

Energy/Fatigue

84

56

0.8

Figuras y tablas -
Table 3. Wood 2003: SF‐36 scores for 8 domains at final follow‐up
Table 4. Complications

Complications

Wood 2003

Siebenga 2006

Surgical

Non‐surgical

Surgical

Non‐surgical

Wound dehiscence

2

Instrumentation/bone failure

2

1

Wound infection

1 deep

2 (1 deep)

Pseudarthrosis

1

Neurapraxia

1

Ketoacidosis

1

Instrumentation break

2

1

Urinary tract infection

2

1

Seroma

1

Instrumentation removal (for complication)

6

2

Skin blisters

1

Severe pain at the bone harvest site

1

Conus medullaris syndrome

1

Continued use of orthosis reflecting irrational fear
of neurologic deterioration. Severe depression.

1

Scoliosis (and signs of nerve root compression)

1

Total

19

2

7

3

Note there are repeated counts in this table.

Figuras y tablas -
Table 4. Complications
Table 5. Correlation between the final amount of kyphosis or canal compromise and the reported pain or disability

Siebenga 2006

RMDQ‐24

VAS spine score

VAS pain

LSA

RSA

LSA

RSA

LSA

RSA

r = ‐0.30,

P = 0.09

r= ‐0.29,

P = 0.11

r = 0.20,

P = 0.29

r = 0.17,

P = 0.38

r = 0.20,

P = 0.29

r = 0.17,

P = 0.38

Wood 2003

kyphosis and pain score

Roland and Morris questionnaire

Oswestry questionnaire

Surgical group

r = 0.05; P = 0.8

r = 0.05; P = 0.8

r = 0.3; P = 0.14

Non‐surgical group

r = 0.22; P = 0.29

r = 0.19; P = 0.39

r = 0.25; P = 0.27

LSA = local sagittal angle
P = P value
r = correlation coefficient
RMDQ‐24 = Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (score 0 to 24)
RSA = regional sagittal angle
VAS = visual analogue score or scale

Figuras y tablas -
Table 5. Correlation between the final amount of kyphosis or canal compromise and the reported pain or disability
Comparison 1. Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Visual Analogue Pain Scores (0 to 100 mm: worst) at follow‐up Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Roland and Morris Questionnaire at follow‐up (0 to 24: worst result) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Visual Analogue Scale Spine Score (0 to 100 mm: best) at follow‐up Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4 Oswestry Questionnaire at minimum 24 months follow‐up Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Return to work Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Subsequent surgery (for complications) Show forest plot

2

79

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

8.39 [1.12, 62.87]

7 Complications Show forest plot

2

79

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.85 [0.83, 9.75]

8 Kyphosis at follow‐up (degrees) Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9 Degree of canal compromise (% occlusion) at 2 years Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment