Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research ›› 2020, Vol. 24 ›› Issue (36): 5880-5885.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2912

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Meta-analysis of 3D printing-assisted posterior osteotomy for spinal deformity

Wu Ronghai1, Zhou Junde1, Chen Peiyou1, Yuan Liyi1, Huang Junlin1, Liang Zeqian1, Wang Huimin2   

  1. 1Second Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510405, Guangdong Province, China; 2Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong Province, China
  • Received:2020-02-13 Revised:2020-02-22 Accepted:2020-04-11 Online:2020-12-28 Published:2020-10-27
  • Contact: Wang Huimin, Professor, Chief physician, Master’s supervisor, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong Province, China
  • About author:Wu Ronghai, Master candidate, Second Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510405, Guangdong Province, China

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: 3D printing technology was more and more widely used in spine surgery, and it had a good auxiliary surgery effect. However, there is currently no evidence-based medical evidence to confirm the efficacy and safety of 3D printing-assisted posterior osteotomy for spinal deformities.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the efficacy of 3D printing-assisted posterior osteotomy in the treatment of spinal deformity.

METHODS: Such databases as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and CBM were searched from their inception to December 2019 for the research investigating 3D printing in the treatment of spinal deformity. English and Chinese search terms were “3D printing”, “rapid prototyping”, “spinal deformity”. Literature review, data extraction, and quality evaluation were performed independently by two researchers.The meta-analyses were performed using the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) Six literatures involving 282 patients were included. There were 139 cases in the 3D printing group and 143 cases in the conventional group. (2) Meta-analysis results showed that in the 3D printing group, the operation time and surgical radiation exposure time were shorter, and intraoperative blood loss was less than in the conventional group (P < 0.05). (3) Cobb angle, Cobb angle correction rate, screw placement accuracy, and Oswestry disability index were all superior to the conventional group (P < 0.05). (4) In terms of complications, the difference was not statistically significant between the 3D printing group and conventional group (P > 0.05). (5) Above data verified that 3D printing-assisted posterior osteotomy can significantly reduce operation time and intraoperative blood loss and improve the surgical effect.

Key words: bone, spine, 3D printing, spinal deformity, spinal surgery, osteotomy, evidence-based medicine, meta-analysis

CLC Number: