Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The Utility of Postoperative Bracing on Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes Following Cervical Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review.
Hasan, Sazid; Babrowicz, Joseph; Waheed, Muhammad A; Piche, Joshua David; Patel, Rakesh; Aleem, Ilyas.
Afiliação
  • Hasan S; 159878Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, MI, USA.
  • Babrowicz J; College of Literature, Science and the Arts, 114460University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
  • Waheed MA; 159878Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, MI, USA.
  • Piche JD; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 21614University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
  • Patel R; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 21614University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
  • Aleem I; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 21614University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Global Spine J ; 13(2): 512-522, 2023 Mar.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35499300
ABSTRACT
STUDY

DESIGN:

Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES:

To determine the radiographic and clinical utility of postoperative orthoses following cervical spine surgery.

METHODS:

We performed a search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline Ovid, and SCOPUS databases from inception until November 2021. Eligible studies included outcomes of postoperative bracing vs no bracing following cervical spine surgery. The primary outcome of interest was fusion rates after cervical surgery in braced vs unbraced patients. Secondary outcomes included patient reported outcomes and complication rates.

RESULTS:

A total of 3232 titles were initially screened. After inclusion criteria were applied, 7 studies (550 patients) were included, which compared results of braced vs unbraced patients after cervical spine surgery. These studies showed acceptable reliability for inclusion based on the Methodical Index for Non-Randomized studies and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme assessment tools. There were no significant differences in fusion rates or complications between braced vs unbraced patients identified in any study. Patient reported pain and quality of life measures between braced and unbraced groups varied amongst studies, without any clear overall advantages favoring either method.

CONCLUSIONS:

This systematic review found that external bracing, though widely used following cervical spine surgery, may not offer any advantages in patient-reported outcomes, as compared to not bracing. In regard to the effect of bracing on fusion rates, no strong consensus can be made as the methods of fusion assessment in the included studies were heterogenous and suboptimal. Future high-quality studies using recommended methods of fusion assessment are needed to adequately address this important question.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Revista: Global Spine J Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Revista: Global Spine J Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos