IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0199623.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interspinous process devices for treatment of degenerative lumbar spine stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Arthur Werner Poetscher
  • Andre Felix Gentil
  • Mario Ferretti
  • Mario Lenza

Abstract

Background: Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis is a condition related to aging in which structural changes cause narrowing of the central canal and intervertebral foramen. It is currently the leading cause for spinal surgery in patients over 65 years. Interspinous process devices (IPDs) were introduced as a less invasive surgical alternative, but questions regarding safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness are still unanswered. Objectives: The aim of this study was to provide complete and reliable information regarding benefits and harms of IPDs when compared to conservative treatment or decompression surgery and suggest directions for forthcoming RCTs. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and LILACS for randomized and quasi-randomized trials, without language or period restrictions, comparing IPDs to conservative treatment or decompressive surgery in adults with symptomatic degenerative lumbar spine stenosis. Data extraction and analysis were conducted following the Cochrane Handbook. Primary outcomes were pain assessment, functional impairment, Zurich Claudication Questionnaire, and reoperation rates. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, complications, and cost-effectiveness. This systematic review was registered at Prospero (International prospective register of systematic reviews) under number 42015023604. Results: The search strategy resulted in 17 potentially eligible reports. At the end, nine reports were included and eight were excluded. Overall quality of evidence was low. One trial compared IPDs to conservative treatment: IPDs presented better pain, functional status, quality of life outcomes, and higher complication risk. Five trials compared IPDs to decompressive surgery: pain, functional status, and quality of life had similar outcomes. IPD implant presented a significantly higher risk of reoperation. We found low-quality evidence that IPDs resulted in similar outcomes when compared to standard decompression surgery. Primary and secondary outcomes were not measured in all studies and were often published in incomplete form. Subgroup analysis was not feasible. Difficulty in contacting authors may have prevented us of including data in quantitative analysis. Conclusions: Patients submitted to IPD implants had significantly higher rates of reoperation, with lower cost-effectiveness. Future trials should improve in design quality and data reporting, with longer follow-up periods.

Suggested Citation

  • Arthur Werner Poetscher & Andre Felix Gentil & Mario Ferretti & Mario Lenza, 2018. "Interspinous process devices for treatment of degenerative lumbar spine stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0199623
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0199623
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0199623
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0199623&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0199623?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    2. Kenneth F Schulz & Douglas G Altman & David Moher & for the CONSORT Group, 2010. "CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomised Trials," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(3), pages 1-7, March.
    3. Ai-Min Wu & Yong Zhou & Qing-Long Li & Xin-Lei Wu & Yong-Long Jin & Peng Luo & Yong-Long Chi & Xiang-Yang Wang, 2014. "Interspinous Spacer versus Traditional Decompressive Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-6, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shalin Lee Wan Fei & Khatijah L Abdullah, 2015. "Effect of turning vs. supine position under phototherapy on neonates with hyperbilirubinemia: a systematic review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5-6), pages 672-682, March.
    2. Savita Bakhshi & Alison E. While, 2013. "Health Professionals’ Alcohol-Related Professional Practices and the Relationship between Their Personal Alcohol Attitudes and Behavior and Professional Practices: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-31, December.
    3. Mulhall, Peter & Taggart, Laurence & Coates, Vivien & McAloon, Toni & Hassiotis, Angela, 2018. "A systematic review of the methodological and practical challenges of undertaking randomised-controlled trials with cognitive disability populations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 114-128.
    4. Faith Donald & Kelley Kilpatrick & Kim Reid & Nancy Carter & Ruth Martin-Misener & Denise Bryant-Lukosius & Patricia Harbman & Sharon Kaasalainen & Deborah A. Marshall & Renee Charbonneau-Smith & Erin, 2014. "A Systematic Review of the Cost-Effectiveness of Nurse Practitioners and Clinical Nurse Specialists: What Is the Quality of the Evidence?," Nursing Research and Practice, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-28, September.
    5. Kartika Saraswati & Brittany J Maguire & Alistair R D McLean & Sauman Singh-Phulgenda & Roland C Ngu & Paul N Newton & Nicholas P J Day & Philippe J Guérin, 2021. "Systematic review of the scrub typhus treatment landscape: Assessing the feasibility of an individual participant-level data (IPD) platform," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-22, October.
    6. Ana Virgolino & Osvaldo Santos & Joana Costa & Mónica Fialho & Ivo Iavicoli & Tiina Santonen & Hanna Tolonen & Evangelia Samoli & Klea Katsouyanni & Georgios Baltatzis & Flavia Ruggieri & Annalisa Abb, 2021. "Challenges to Evidence Synthesis and Identification of Data Gaps in Human Biomonitoring," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-11, March.
    7. Anaïs Besson & Alice Tarpin & Valentin Flaudias & Georges Brousse & Catherine Laporte & Amanda Benson & Valentin Navel & Jean-Baptiste Bouillon-Minois & Frédéric Dutheil, 2021. "Smoking Prevalence among Physicians: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-58, December.
    8. Gianfranco Sanson & Ercole Vellone & Mari Kangasniemi & Rosaria Alvaro & Fabio D'Agostino, 2017. "Impact of nursing diagnoses on patient and organisational outcomes: a systematic literature review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(23-24), pages 3764-3783, December.
    9. Pei-Ying Kobres & Jean-Paul Chretien & Michael A Johansson & Jeffrey J Morgan & Pai-Yei Whung & Harshini Mukundan & Sara Y Del Valle & Brett M Forshey & Talia M Quandelacy & Matthew Biggerstaff & Ceci, 2019. "A systematic review and evaluation of Zika virus forecasting and prediction research during a public health emergency of international concern," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-21, October.
    10. Kun-ming Tao & Xiao-qian Li & Qing-hui Zhou & David Moher & Chang-quan Ling & Wei-feng Yu, 2011. "From QUOROM to PRISMA: A Survey of High-Impact Medical Journals' Instructions to Authors and a Review of Systematic Reviews in Anesthesia Literature," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-5, November.
    11. Mary Ellen Kerans & Anne Murray & Sergi Sabatè, 2016. "Content and Phrasing in Titles of Original Research and Review Articles in 2015: Range of Practice in Four Clinical Journals," Publications, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-22, April.
    12. Isabel Rodríguez-Gallego & Fatima Leon-Larios & Isabel Corrales-Gutierrez & Juan Diego González-Sanz, 2021. "Impact and Effectiveness of Group Strategies for Supporting Breastfeeding after Birth: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-19, March.
    13. Enrique Orduña-Malea & Adolfo Alonso-Arroyo & José-Antonio Ontalba-Ruipérez & Ferrán Catalá-López, 2023. "Evaluating the online impact of reporting guidelines for randomised trial reports and protocols: a cross-sectional web-based data analysis of CONSORT and SPIRIT initiatives," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 407-440, January.
    14. Joanna L Hudson & Peter Bower & Evangelos Kontopantelis & Penny Bee & Janine Archer & Rose Clarke & Andrew S Moriarty & David A Richards & Simon Gilbody & Karina Lovell & Chris Dickens & Linda Gask & , 2019. "Impact of telephone delivered case-management on the effectiveness of collaborative care for depression and anti-depressant use: A systematic review and meta-regression," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-17, June.
    15. Takeshi Seta & Yoshimitsu Takahashi & Yoshinori Noguchi & Satoru Shikata & Tatsuya Sakai & Kyoko Sakai & Yukitaka Yamashita & Takeo Nakayama, 2017. "Effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori eradication in the prevention of primary gastric cancer in healthy asymptomatic people: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing risk ratio with risk differ," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, August.
    16. Sandra Nogueira & Ana Catarina Canário & Isabel Abreu-Lima & Pedro Teixeira & Orlanda Cruz, 2022. "Group Triple P Intervention Effects on Children and Parents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-20, February.
    17. Andrea C Lörwald & Felicitas-Maria Lahner & Zineb M Nouns & Christoph Berendonk & John Norcini & Robert Greif & Sören Huwendiek, 2018. "The educational impact of Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) and Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) and its association with implementation: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, June.
    18. Jianzhang Wang & Changping Cai & Shili Wang, 2014. "Merocel versus Nasopore for Nasal Packing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-9, April.
    19. Belinda J Burford & Vivian Welch & Elizabeth Waters & Peter Tugwell & David Moher & Jennifer O’Neill & Tracey Koehlmoos & Mark Petticrew, 2013. "Testing the PRISMA-Equity 2012 Reporting Guideline: the Perspectives of Systematic Review Authors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-1, October.
    20. Graeme D. Smith & Leslie Gelling & Carol Haigh & Sue Barnason & Helen Allan & Kay Penny & Debra Jackson, 2018. "Transparency in the reporting of nursing research," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3-4), pages 475-477, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0199623. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.