These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Posterior fossa decompression with or without duraplasty for patients with chiari type I malformation and basilar impression: a meta-analysis.
    Author: Cai S, Tian Y, Zhang J, Shen J, Hu J, Chen F.
    Journal: Eur Spine J; 2021 Feb; 30(2):454-460. PubMed ID: 33091143.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: To compare clinical effect and safety between posterior fossa decompression with duraplasty (PFDD) and posterior fossa decompression without duraplasty (PFD) in treatment of Chiari type I malformation and basilar impression. METHODS: A comprehensive computer search was conducted from 2000 to 2019. The quality assessment was performed by the QUADAS-2 tool. The clinical value of comparison between PFDD and PFD was evaluated by using the pooled estimate of sensitivity and specificity. In addition, sensitivity analysis and bias analysis were applied to ensure the accuracy of the results. RESULTS: Finally, 468 patients were enrolled in 6 studies and ultimately met the eligibility criteria. The PFDD and PFD groups were 282 and 186, respectively. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference in the Chicago Chiari Outcome Scale (COSS score) (MD = 0.14, 95% CI [-0.23, 0.50], P = 0.47; P = heterogeneity = 0.86, I2 = 0%). Meanwhile, Significant difference existed in length of stay (MD = -1.08, 95% CI [-1.32, -0.84], P = 0.001; heterogeneity P < 0.000001, I2 = 85%) and complications (OR = 0.35, 95%CI [0.20, 0.62], P = 0.0003; P for Heterogeneity = 0.04, I2 = 56%). CONCLUSION: PFD is a more efficient and safer therapy than PFDD in the treatment of Chiari type I malformation with basilar impression.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]