Review Article
Topping-Off Technology versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Meta-Analysis
Table 1
Characteristics of included studies.
| | Study | Year | Country | Study type | Quality (NOS) | LoE | Device | Patients (F/M) | Age (years) | Follow-up (months) | Segments | | PLIF | Topping-off | PLIF | Topping-off |
| | Putzier et al. [16] | 2010 | Germany | Pro | 7 | II | Dynesys | 30 (16/14） | 30 (13/17) | 44.6 | 44.9 | 76.4 | 1 | | Kaner et al. [33] | 2010 | Turkey | Pro | 6 | II | Coflex | 20 | 26 | — | — | 40 | — | | Liu et al. [25] | 2012 | China | Retro | 7 | III | Coflex | 48 (20/28) | 31 (11/20) | 41.5 | 44.6 | 24 | 1 | | Lee et al. [24] | 2013 | Korea | Retro | 7 | III | DIAM | 50 (20/30) | 25 (10/25) | 65.9 ± 8.5 | 65.4 ± 8.7 | 46.8 | 1 | | Lee et al. [11] | 2015 | Korea | Retro | 8 | III | DTO/Nflex | 10 (5/5) | 15 (11/4) | 63.9 ± 7.8 | 60.7 ± 8.3 | 48 | 2 | | Zhu et al. [14] | 2015 | China | Retro | 6 | III | Wallis | 23 (12/11) | 22 (8/14) | 40 | 44.5 | 24 | 1 | | Lu et al. [23] | 2015 | China (Taiwan) | Retro | 7 | III | DIAM | 42 (14/28) | 49 (16/33) | 64.5 ± 7.2 | 59.1 ± 8.6 | 41.5 | 2–4 | | Li and Wu [31] | 2015 | China | Pro | 7 | III | Coflex | 30 (11/19) | 30 (12/18) | 46.4 | 47.3 | 20 (12–42) | 1 | | Chen et al. [18] | 2016 | China | Retro | 7 | III | Coflex | 88 (34/54) | 76 (28/48) | 58.31 ± 4.6 | 57.34 ± 5.1 | 47.2 | 1 | | Aygun et al. [22] | 2017 | Turkey | Retro | 6 | III | Cosmic | 59 (34/25) | 42 (19/23) | 54.2 ± 5.11 | 52 ± 6.02 | 79 | 1–5 | | Wang et al. [27] | 2017 | China | Retro | 7 | III | K-rod | 34 (15/19) | 26 (12/14) | 44.9 | 46.7 | 17.1 | 2 | | Chen et al. [28] | 2017 | China | Retro | 8 | III | Coflex | 68 (26/42) | 60 (22/38) | 56.2 ± 4.2 | 54.2 ± 4.1 | 50 | 2 | | Cao et al. [29] | 2017 | China | Retro | 6 | III | Coflex | 59 (25/34) | 48 (22/26) | 39.3 | 38 | 30 | 1 | | Li et al. [30] | 2017 | China | Retro | 6 | III | Coflex | 54 (29/25) | 45 (22/21) | 63.7 | 61.5 | 35.2 | 1–2 | | Dobran et al. [32] | 2018 | Italy | Retro | 5 | III | NFlex | 12 | 9 | 63 | 66 | 78 | 1–2 | | Herren et al. [21] | 2018 | Germany | RCT | 9 | I | Dynesys | 14 (8/6) | 15 (6/9) | 61.78 (34–76) | 60.9 (47–80) | 37.68 (1.38–72) | 1–5 | | Li et al. [26] | 2019 | China | Retro | 6 | III | Coflex | 54 (29/25) | 45 (24/21) | 53.5 (46–59) | 65.7 (60–75) | 56.4 ± 105.6 (36–37) | 2 |
|
|
Notice: NOS = Newcastle–Ottawa Scale score; RCT = randomized controlled trial; Retro = retrospective cohort study; Pro = prospective cohort study; PLIF = posterior lumbar interbody fusion.
|
