Objective To investigate risk factors of cage retropulsion after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in China and to establish a scoring system of cage retropulsion. Methods The retrospective analysis was based on two hospital databases. The medical data records of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cage retropulsion were selected from August 2009 to August 2019. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were set in advance. Risk factors including patients' baseline demographics (age, gender, operation diagnosis time difference), preoperative neurological symptoms, whether the fusion involves single or double segments, screw type, intraoperative compression, preoperative bone mineral density, whether there are neurological symptoms before surgery, whether there is urine dysfunction before surgery, disease type, complete removal of the endplate, and patient's education level. The research endpoint was the retropulsion of fusion cages. The Kaplan–Meier (K‐M) method was used to analyze potential risk factors, and multivariate Cox regression was used to identify independent risk factors (P < 0.05). The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (version 22.0; SPSS, IBM, Chicago, IL, USA) software was used for statistical analysis, and univariate analysis was used to screen out the factors related to cage retropulsion. All independent risk factors were included to predict the survival time of the retropulsion of cage. Results This study included a total of 32 patients with PLIF between 2009 to 2019. All patients were residents of China. Univariate analysis showed that there were 13 patients over 60 years old and 19 patients under 60 years old. There were 20 male patients and 12 female patients. The surgical diagnosis time was seven patients within 1 month, 17 patients within 1 to 3 months, and eight patients over 3 months. The disease type was 18 cases of lumbar disc herniation, 10 cases of lumbar spinal stenosis, four cases of lumbar spondylolisthesis. The fusion segment was 18 cases of single segment, 14 cases of double segment. The intraoperative compression was seven cases of compression, 25 cases of no compression. The preoperative bone mineral density was 10 cases of low density, 18 cases of normal, four cases of osteoporosis. The screw type was 27 cases of universal screw, five cases of one‐way screw. Preoperative neurological symptoms were found in 25 cases and not in seven cases. Preoperative urination dysfunction occurred in 8 cases, whereas 24 cases did not have this dysfunction. The endplate was completely removed in 10 cases and not in 22 cases. Education level was nine cases of primary school education, 10 cases of secondary school, 13 cases of university level. Cox regression analysis showed that intraoperative pressure (hazard ratio [HR] = 4.604, P = 0.015) and complete removal of the endplate (HR = 0.205, P = 0.027) are associated with the time of cage retropulsion. According to the HR of each factor, the scoring rules were formulated, and the patients were divided into the low‐risk group, moderate‐r...
Background. A relationship between matrix metalloproteinase-1 (MMP-1)-1607 (rs1799750) gene polymorphism and osteoarthritis (OA) susceptibility was reported in the Bioscience Reports journal; however, these results were inconsistent. To evaluate the specific relationship, we used a meta-analysis study to clarify the controversy. Methods. The relevant articles were retrieved on 20 October 2018 from PubMed, Elsevier, Springer, Ebase (Ovid), and Google Scholar. The number of alleles and genotypes for MMP-1 was obtained. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to estimate the association between MMP-1-1607 (rs1799750) 1G/2G promoter polymorphism and OA, while the Egger’s test was used to assess heterogeneity among studies and publication bias. All statistical analyses were conducted using STATA 12.0 software. Results. A total of six case–control studies covering 1133 cases and 1119 controls were included in the final meta-analysis. There was no significant association between MMP-1-1607 1G/2G promoter polymorphism and OA in all genetic models (2G versus 1G: OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.78–1.60; 1G/2G versus 1G/1G: OR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.32–1.67; 2G/2G versus 1G/1G: OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 0.57–2.98; the recessive model: OR = 1.23, 95% CI = 0.63-2.41; and the dominant model: OR = 1.25, 95% CI = 0.79–1.97). We obtained similar results for the subgroup analysis using ethnicity and type of disease. Conclusion. We systematically investigated the association between MMP-1-1607 (rs1799750) 1G/2G polymorphism and OA susceptibility; however, the results show no correlation.
Background A few months ago, the Bioscience Reports journal showed that growth differentiation factor 5 (GDF5) rs143383 genetic polymorphism increases the susceptibility of knee osteoarthritis (KOA), but previous studies’ results have debates about available data. Considering the availability of more recent data, we focus on clarifying the relationship of KOA and GDF5 rs143383 genetic polymorphism by a meta-analysis of case-control trial data. Methods The eligible studies from the time of database established to Oct. 2019 were collected from PubMed, Springer, Cochrane library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wan Fang library. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to estimate the association between these polymorphisms and KOA risk. The meta-analysis was completed by STATA 18.0 software. Results A total of 196 studies were collected, 16 of them included in final meta-analysis (7997 cases and 12,684 controls). There was significant association between GDF5 rs143383 polymorphism and KOA in all genetic models (for Allele model (C versus T): OR = 0.84 (95% CI = 0.76–0.91); dominate model (CC+CT versus TT): OR = 0.80 (95% CI = 0.72–0.90); recessive model (CC versus CT+TT): OR = 0.79 (95% CI = 0.68–0.92); heterozygote model (CT versus CC+TT): OR = 0.89 (95% CI = 0.80–0.97); homozygous model (CC versus TT): OR = 0.71 (95% CI = 0.60–0.85)). In the subgroup analysis, we obtained the results that there is no significance among Asians. Conclusion GDF5 rs143383 genetic polymorphism increases the risk of KOA among Caucasians; CC genotype and C allele are protective factors for the susceptibility of KOA among Caucasians.
Background A few months ago, the Bioscience Reports journal showed that Growth Differentiation Factor 5 (GDF5) rs143383 genetic polymorphism increases the susceptibility of knee osteoarthritis (KOA), but previous studies’ results have debates about available data. Considering the availability of more recent data, we focus on clarifying the relationship of KOA and GDF5 rs143383 genetic polymorphism by a meta-analysis of case-control trial data. Methods The eligible studies from the time of database established to Oct. 2019 were collected from PubMed, Springer, Cochrane library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wan Fang library. The meta-analysis was completed by STATA 18.0 software. Two independent authors extracted the data and assessed case-control trial quality. Results A total of 196 studies were collected, 16 of them including in final meta-analysis (7997 cases and 12684 controls). There was significant association between GDF 5 rs143383 polymorphism and KOA in all genetic models (for Allele model (C versus T): OR = 0.84 (95% CI = 0.76-0.91); dominate model (CC+CT versus TT): OR = 0.80(95% CI = (0.72-0.90); recessive model (CC versus CT+TT): OR= 0.79 (95% CI = 0.68-0.92); heterozygote model (CT versus CC+TT): OR = 0.89 (95% CI=0.80-0.97); homozygous model (CC versus TT): OR = 0.71 (95% CI=0.60-0.85). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, we obtained the results is no significant among Asians. Conclusion GDF5 rs143383 genetic polymorphism increases the risk of KOA among Caucasians; CC genotype and C allele are protective factors for the susceptibility of KOA among Caucasians.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.