What were the advantages of microendoscopic discectomy for XXXX comparing with open discectomy: a meta-analysis?

@entity1 @entity890 @entity650 @entity190 @entity4403 @entity130 @entity1851
The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of @entity4403 ( @entity4403 ) and open discectomy (OD) for @entity890 ( @entity890 ). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing @entity4403 with OD for @entity890 were searched comprehensively in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library. Relevant studies retrieved, data extracted and the quality of included studies were independently performed by two authors. RevMan software (Version 5.2.0) was used to analyse and synthesis relevant data of the included studies. Nine RCTs involving 774 @entity1 were obtained and reported the relevant outcome measures. Compared with OD group, there were significant difference in the general operation indicators including operation time, @entity190 , site of incision, hospital stay and time of return to work, biochemical indexes including @entity1851 and @entity650 ( @entity650 ) in @entity4403 group. Meanwhile, there were no difference in effective rate, complication including total complications, dural leaks occurred and recurrence of the disc herniation, compared @entity4403 group with OD group. @entity4403 had slighter @entity130 , milder @entity190 and shorter healing time than OD. The results demonstrated @entity4403 has great efficacy and safety comparable to OD. So we think that @entity4403 can be used routinely for @entity890 @entity1 , especially the @entity1 of old and intolerable major surgery. Meanwhile, it is necessary for surgeon to master indication and contraindication of @entity4403 and improve the operative technique.
