Sequestrectomy versus microdiscectomy in the treatment of XXXX : a meta-analysis.

@entity1 @entity615 @entity158 @entity890
BACKGROUND: It remains unknown whether sequestrectomy provides better outcomes than microdiscectomy for @entity890 ( @entity890 ). Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the effects of sequestrectomy and microdiscectomy in the treatment of @entity1 with @entity890 . METHODS: Clinical trials published in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically reviewed to compare the effects of sequestrectomy and microdiscectomy for @entity890 . Outcomes included reherniation rate, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, and postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scales for @entity615 . A fixed-effects or random-effects were used to pool the estimates, depending on the heterogeneity among the studies. RESULTS: Five cohorts and two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 929 @entity1 met the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. All @entity1 underwent sequestrectomy or microdiscectomy. Pooled estimates showed that @entity1 treated with sequestrectomy had comparable effects in reherniation rate (RR = 1.36, 95% CI: 0.81, 2.27; P = 0.240), length of hospital stay (WMD = -0.22 days, 95% CI: -0.45, 0.01; P = 0.060), and postoperative VAS scales for leg @entity158 (WMD = 0.53, 95% CI: -1.54, 2.60; P = 0.617) or back @entity158 (WMD = 0.18, 95% CI: -1.64, 2.00; P = 0.846), but had a shorter duration of surgery (WMD = -6.97 minutes, 95% CI: -12.15, -1.78; P = 0.008), when compared with those treated with microdiscectomy. CONCLUSION: Based on the current evidence, sequestrectomy significantly reduced the operational time, but had similar effects on reherniation rate, length of hospital stay, and postoperative VAS scales for @entity615 , when compared with microdiscectomy. Further well-designed randomized controlled studies are needed to identify our findings.
